Wakilii

Hardware Solutions Ltd v Daiko Construction Co. Ltd (Civil Application No. 258 of 2017)

High Court · [2017] UGCOMMC 293 · 2017 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside arbitral award arising from CADER Arbitration Cause No. 21 of 2016
Decision
Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed with costs to the respondent

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

An application to set aside an arbitral award must establish one of the strict grounds enumerated in section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Where the applicant merely challenges findings of fact regarding retention monies and costs without demonstrating any statutory ground for setting aside, the court has no basis to interfere with the arbitrator's award. Disagreement with factual findings does not constitute a ground for setting aside under the Act.

Outcome

Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed with costs to the respondent

Facts

Hardware Solutions Ltd applied to set aside an arbitral award made on 4 October 2016 by Eng. Mbabazi Anania in CADER Arbitration Cause No. 21 of 2016. The arbitrator had awarded Daiko Construction Co. Ltd retention monies of UGX 6,108,705 and costs of UGX 11,533,000. Hardware Solutions contested these awards on grounds that: the arbitrator erred in awarding retention monies when Hardware Solutions' works allegedly contained grave defects requiring rectification at a cost exceeding the retention sum; the arbitrator wrongly awarded costs when Hardware Solutions was not entitled to any claims; and the costs were not taxed. Daiko Construction maintained that the arbitrator had properly found Hardware Solutions breached the contract by failing to pay retention monies, that any defects were considered during the arbitrator's site visit, and that Hardware Solutions had not given notice to Daiko to rectify alleged defects before terminating the contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the arbitral award made on 4th October 2016 by Engineer Anania Mbabazi in CADER Arbitration Cause No. 21 of 2016 should be set aside.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration — Setting Aside Awards — Statutory Grounds — Scope of Court's Jurisdiction
Recourse to court against an arbitral award is limited to applications for setting aside under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and the court can set aside an award only on the strict grounds enumerated in that section.
Arbitration — Setting Aside Awards — Distinction Between Appeal and Application to Set Aside
An application to set aside an arbitral award based on challenges to findings of fact constitutes an impermissible appeal clothed in the form of an application, and falls outside the scope of the court's jurisdiction under section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Arbitration — Setting Aside Awards — Court's Limited Supervisory Role
The court hearing an application to set aside an arbitral award is not mandated to open up and review the proceedings of the arbitral tribunal on questions of fact; its jurisdiction is confined to determining whether any of the statutory grounds for setting aside have been established.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (1)

  • SDV Transami v Agrimag Ltd (Arbitration Cause No. 2 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Hardware Solutions Ltd v Daiko Construction Co. Ltd (Civil Application No. 258 of 2017) [2017] UGCommC 293 (21 August 2017)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.