One Solutions Ltd v Eastern and Southern African Management Institute (Miscellaneous Cause No. 33 of 2015)
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 High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an arbitral award under Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act unless the parties to the arbitration have expressly agreed to permit such appeals on questions of law. Section 9 of the Act expressly ousts the court's jurisdiction except as provided in the Act itself. The application was dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Application dismissed on jurisdictional grounds; arbitral award remains undisturbed
Facts
One Solutions Limited and Eastern and Southern African Management Institute entered into a tenancy agreement containing an arbitration clause. The agreement included clause 11(i), which made the agreement subject to a technical survey and funding arrangements for a 5-year business plan. An arbitrator, Mr. Christopher Bwanika, delivered an award on 23 June 2015. The applicant sought to have the award varied or set aside, arguing that clause 11(i) was a condition subsequent that discharged its performance obligations when it failed to secure funding. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the parties had not agreed to permit appeals from the arbitral award as required by Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Issues
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an arbitral award under Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act where the parties have not expressly agreed to such appeal.
- Whether clause 11(i) of the Tenancy Agreement constituted a condition subsequent that would discharge the applicant's performance obligations.
Orders
- Preliminary objection sustained.
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
Cases cited (4)
- L'Estrange v Gracoub Limited [1934] 2 KB 394
- Babcon Uganda Ltd v Mbale Resort Hotel Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 87 of 2011)
- David Kayondo v The Cooperative Bank Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1991)
- London Hospital v Jacob [1956] 2 All ER 603
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.