Wakilii

Kinyara Sugar Works v Hajji Kasimbiraine (Miscellaneous Application No. 151 of 2017)

High Court · [2017] UGCOMMC 63 · 2017 Application Granted — Arbitral Award Set Aside AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside arbitral award arising from High Court Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2016
Decision
Arbitral award set aside; matter may be remitted to fresh arbitrator if parties so wish, to be appointed with involvement of President of Law Society

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 set aside the arbitral award on three grounds: the arbitrator dealt with a dispute (compensation for molasses and bagasse) not contemplated by the Cane Production Contract, which amounted to an unauthorized amendment contrary to Article 10 of the contract; the appointment of the arbitrator was not in accordance with the contractual procedure requiring involvement of the President of the Law Society; and the arbitrator exhibited evident partiality by prematurely releasing the award to the respondent before the official delivery date and failing to fully disclose prior work with out-growers.

Outcome

Arbitral award set aside; matter may be remitted to fresh arbitrator if parties so wish, to be appointed with involvement of President of Law Society

Facts

Kinyara Sugar Works Ltd (applicant) had a Cane Production Contract with sugarcane out-growers including Hajji Kasimbiraine Mohamoud (respondent). The contract provided for purchase of sugarcane but did not address by-products such as molasses and bagasse. A dispute arose and was referred to arbitration before Arbitrator Wilson Keezi, who was appointed through CADER without involvement of the President of the Law Society. The arbitrator delivered a partial award on 30 January 2017 and a further award on 2 February 2017, which amended the contract to include compensation for molasses and bagasse. The applicant alleged the arbitrator had worked with out-growers previously and refused to fully disclose this during preliminary meetings. The applicant further alleged that the respondent received a copy of the award on 1 February 2017, before official delivery on 2 February 2017, evidenced by a letter dated 30 January 2017 that discussed the award's contents.

Issues

  1. Whether the arbitral award dealt with a dispute not contemplated by the parties when it amended the contract to include compensation for molasses and bagasse.
  2. Whether the composition of the arbitral tribunal was in accordance with the agreement of the parties, particularly regarding involvement of the President of the Law Society.
  3. Whether the arbitrator exhibited evident partiality in the proceedings.
  4. Whether the arbitral award was in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Orders

  • The arbitral award arising from CAD/ARB No. 02 of 2016 is set aside.
  • The President of the Law Society shall be involved in appointing a fresh arbitrator should the parties wish to submit to arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
  • Each party shall bear own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Setting Aside Arbitral Awards — Dispute Not Contemplated by Parties — Amendment of Contract by Arbitrator
An arbitral award may be set aside under Section 34(2)(a)(iv) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act where the arbitrator deals with a dispute not contemplated by the parties' agreement by effectively amending a contract to include new subject matter without the parties' consensus, particularly where the contract expressly provides the procedure for amendments.
Contract Amendment — Requirement for Consensus — Sanctity of Contractual Terms
Where a contract expressly provides for amendment only by written agreement between the parties or in specified circumstances, an arbitrator has no authority to impose amendments outside those provisions, even if the arbitrator considers existing terms oppressive, as mature contracting parties of full age and competent understanding are entitled to have their freely entered contracts held sacred and enforced as written.
Composition of Arbitral Tribunal — Appointment Contrary to Contractual Procedure
An arbitral award may be set aside under Section 34(2)(a)(v) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act where the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties, including where the parties' contract provides for nomination of an arbitrator by the President of the Law Society in the absence of agreement and this procedure is not followed.
Evident Partiality — Disclosure Obligations of Arbitrators — Prior Relationships
Arbitrators have a duty to fully disclose any circumstances likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality, including prior work relationships with a class to which one party belongs, and refusal to make such disclosure when requested by a party gives rise to justifiable doubts warranting setting aside of the award under Section 34(2)(a)(vi) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Evident Partiality — Premature Disclosure of Award — Test for Bias
Evident partiality exists warranting setting aside of an arbitral award where the arbitrator prematurely releases the award to one party before the appointed delivery date, as justice must not only be done but must be manifestly and undoubtedly seen to be done, and the test is whether right-minded persons would think there was a real likelihood of bias in the circumstances.
Partial Awards — Power to Re-open Proceedings
There is nothing unlawful in an arbitrator issuing a partial award resolving some issues and subsequently re-opening proceedings to resolve remaining issues where expert evidence or witnesses are needed, as Section 33(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act contemplates additional arbitral awards on claims presented but omitted from the initial award.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (6)

  • Printing and Numerical Registering Co v Sampson (1875) LR 19 462
  • Michell Lease v Shooting Australia CAS A1 2016
  • [2011] UKSC 41
  • Societe Nykcool v Societe Dole France et al Rev Arb 2011/732
  • R v Sussex Justices ex parte McCarthy [1924] 1 KB 256
  • Metropolitan Properties Co (FGC) Ltd v Lannon (1969) 1 QB 577

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kinyara Sugar Works v Hajji Kasimbiraine (Miscellaneous Application No. 151 of 2017) [2017] UGCommC 63 (6 July 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.