Wakilii

National Social Security Fund v. Alcon International Ltd (Civil Appl. No. 149 of 2011)

Court of Appeal · [2011] UGCA 2 · 2011 Application Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by notice of motion to set aside the Court of Appeal's judgment, a High Court ruling, and an arbitral award; determined on preliminary objections.
Decision
Application struck off as incompetent with costs to the respondent

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 struck out the application, holding that none of the invoked provisions conferred jurisdiction to entertain it. Rule 2(2) and section 98 could not be used where the Court was functus officio after disposing of Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2004 and where the matters could have been raised earlier. Rules 36, 43 and 44 were procedural and gave no such power. Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act did not apply, and any application to set aside the award was res judicata, the matter already decided by the High Court and Court of Appeal. As the same matters were pending in Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2009, the application was also sub judice and incompetent.

Outcome

Application struck off as incompetent with costs to the respondent

Facts

The National Social Security Fund (NSSF) contracted for the construction of Workers' House and later terminated the building contract. Alcon International Ltd sued NSSF for breach of contract; the suit was stayed and referred to arbitration. In 2001 the arbitrator awarded Alcon damages in US dollars. NSSF's application to set aside the award was dismissed by the High Court in 2003, and its appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2004) was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in 2009. NSSF then appealed to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2009, which remained pending. NSSF subsequently sought to set aside the Court of Appeal judgment, the High Court ruling and the arbitral award, relying on findings in Civil Application No. 50 of 2007 that Alcon's directors allegedly manipulated similarly named companies to win the tender. The respondent raised preliminary objections of res judicata and sub judice, and disputed the Court's jurisdiction to entertain the application.

Issues

  1. Whether Rules 2(2), 36, 43 and 44 of the Court of Appeal Rules, section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, or section 11 of the Judicature Act confer jurisdiction on the Court of Appeal to entertain the application.
  2. Whether the application is barred by res judicata.
  3. Whether the application is barred as sub judice given a pending Supreme Court appeal.
  4. Whether the Court of Appeal, having disposed of the appeal, is functus officio.

Orders

  • Application No. 149 of 2010 is incompetent and is struck off.
  • Costs to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Functus Officio — Recall of Judgment After Appeal Disposed
Once the Court of Appeal has disposed of an appeal, it becomes functus officio and cannot invoke Rule 2(2) of its Rules or section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to recall and set aside its own judgment, particularly where the matters raised could have been raised before the appeal was heard.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers — Scope of Rule 2(2) and Section 98 CPA
The inherent power to make orders for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process, including the power to set aside judgments proved null and void, cannot be invoked where no such null and void judgment is identified and where the matter is res judicata or sub judice.
Arbitration & ADR — Setting Aside Award — Time Limit and Res Judicata
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not permit a fresh application to set aside an arbitral award where the award has already been the subject of a High Court application and a Court of Appeal appeal; such an application is res judicata and, where a related appeal is pending in the Supreme Court, sub judice.
Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Correction of Errors Rule and Procedural Rules
Rule 36 (correction of clerical or arithmetical errors) and Rules 43 and 44 (form and support of applications) of the Court of Appeal Rules are procedural and do not confer jurisdiction to entertain an application to set aside substantive judgments, rulings or arbitral awards.

Legislation cited (12)

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.

National Social Security Fund Vs. Alcon International Ltd (Civil Appl. No. 149 of 2011) [2011] UGCA 2 (6 May 2011)
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.