Jinja Production & Millers Association Ltd & 4 Ors v Umeme (U) Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 131 of 2011)
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
The court granted the preliminary objection and stayed proceedings, ordering the dispute to be referred to arbitration as provided in the parties' memoranda of understanding. The court found that the arbitration agreements were valid and not null, void, or inoperative, and that all conditions for referral under section 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act were satisfied. The court imposed a sixty-day time limit for completion of the arbitration process.
Outcome
Proceedings stayed and matter referred to arbitration with a sixty-day time limit for completion
Facts
The plaintiffs, comprising Jinja Produce and Millers Association Ltd and four others, sued Umeme (U) Ltd for breach of contract, refund of security deposits, and compensation for destroyed maize, lost income, and rent arising from the disconnection of electricity supply to their grinding mills. The plaintiffs alleged that they had individual agreements with the defendant for electricity supply, paid their bills, but were forced to form companies and make new security deposits following a meeting in September 2009. The defendant subsequently disconnected their electricity. The plaintiffs had signed memoranda of understanding with the defendant that contained arbitration clauses. The matter had previously been before the Electricity Regulatory Authority for arbitration, but the defendant did not participate, and ERA eventually referred the matter to court.
Issues
- Whether the court should stay proceedings and refer the matter to arbitration where the parties had entered into memoranda of understanding containing arbitration clauses.
- Whether the defendant's failure to participate in earlier arbitration proceedings before the Electricity Regulatory Authority precluded it from seeking referral to arbitration.
Orders
- Preliminary objection allowed.
- Proceedings stayed.
- Matter referred to arbitration as provided for in the memoranda of understanding between the parties.
- Arbitration process to be commenced and concluded within sixty days from the date of the order.
- Arbitrator to strictly follow the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, especially those relating to attendance and decision-making.
- Matter to come before the court for mention and further directions sixty days from the date of the order.
- No order as to costs at this stage; costs to abide the consequences of the arbitration or further orders of the court.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (3)
- Daniel Delestri and Others v Kips Telecoms (U) Ltd (HCCCS No. 207 of 2013)
- UGANDA TELECOM V HITECH TELECOM
- Shell Uganda Ltd v Agip (U) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1995)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.