Wakilii

Pharmaceutical Society Of Uganda v Gabikan Engineering Limited (Miscellaneous Cause 33 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 229 · 2026 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for interim measures of protection under Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act pending arbitration proceedings
Decision
Application stands unchallenged after respondent's affidavits struck out; matter referred to ICAMEK for arbitration of final award and set down for hearing on merits

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 struck out the respondent's affidavits in reply and sur-rejoinder for being argumentative, scandalous, and containing matters of law contrary to Order 19 rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court held that the applicant's reference to arbitration of the adjudicator's final decision of 8 April 2025 was made within the contractual 28-day period, but the reference of the preliminary ruling on costs of 7 March 2025 was time-barred. The court found that the applicant had locus to bring the application under Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in respect of the final award. The court referred the parties to ICAMEK for arbitration proceedings and set the matter down for hearing on its merits.

Outcome

Application stands unchallenged after respondent's affidavits struck out; matter referred to ICAMEK for arbitration of final award and set down for hearing on merits

Facts

The Applicant entered into a construction contract with the Respondent on 2 June 2022 for a Multi-Purpose 4-Level Pharmacy House Phase II at a contract price of UGX 2,308,112,657. The Respondent failed to complete the works within the original twelve-month period and despite extensions to 30 November 2024, the works remained unfinished. A dispute arose regarding completion and payment of Interim Payment Certificate No. 7. The dispute was referred to adjudication through the Uganda Institution of Professional Engineers (UIPE). The Applicant withdrew from the adjudication process after the adjudicator announced fees significantly higher than the contractually agreed rate. The adjudication proceeded in the Applicant's absence, resulting in two decisions: a preliminary ruling on costs on 7 March 2025 and a final decision on 8 April 2025. The Applicant referred the final decision to arbitration by letter to CADER on 11 April 2025 and served a formal Notice of Arbitration on 2 May 2025. The Respondent took steps to enforce the adjudication award, prompting the Applicant to seek interim protective measures.

Issues

  1. Whether the affidavits in reply and sur-rejoinder to the application are competent.
  2. Whether the adjudication award is binding and whether arbitral proceedings were concluded between the parties.
  3. Whether the Applicant is entitled to an order for interim measures of protection against the Respondent.
  4. Whether the Applicant is entitled to costs for this application.

Orders

  • The preliminary objection raised by the Applicant is upheld.
  • The affidavits in reply and in sur-rejoinder deponed by Ronald Mugabi are struck out with costs in accordance with Order 19 rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • The preliminary objection is upheld with respect to the Preliminary Ruling on Costs only.
  • The preliminary objections raised by the Respondent are overruled save for the one in respect of the decision of the Adjudicator regarding costs.
  • The parties are referred for arbitration proceedings to ensue at ICAMEK in only the aspect of the final award dated 8th April 2025.
  • M.C. 0033 of 2025 should be set down for hearing at the earliest to be heard on its merits.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Affidavits — Competency — Argumentative and Scandalous Content
An affidavit must be confined to facts within the deponent's own knowledge and must not be argumentative or contain matters of law. Where an affidavit contains argumentative or scandalous material, delves into matters of law, or contains falsehoods, it is incompetent and may be struck out wholly or in part under Order 19 rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Arbitration & ADR — Adjudication — Time Limits for Reference to Arbitration
Where a contract provides that a party dissatisfied with an adjudicator's decision may refer it to arbitration within 28 days, failing which the decision becomes final and binding, each written decision of the adjudicator triggers its own 28-day challenge period. Failure to refer a decision to arbitration within the stipulated period renders that decision final and binding.
Arbitration & ADR — Commencement of Arbitration — Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, arbitral proceedings in respect of a particular dispute commence on the date on which a request for the dispute to be referred to arbitration is received by the respondent. A letter to an arbitration centre copied to the respondent, followed by formal service of a Notice of Arbitration, constitutes commencement of arbitration within the meaning of the Act.
Arbitration & ADR — Interim Measures — Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits a party to an arbitration agreement to apply to the court for an interim measure of protection before or during arbitral proceedings. The language of the section is permissive and expressly allows a court application before arbitral proceedings commence, provided there is a valid arbitration agreement and the applicant seeks interim preservation of rights pending arbitration.
Arbitration & ADR — Appointment of Arbitrator — Abolition of CADER
Where the Centre for Arbitration and Dispute Resolution (CADER) has been abolished by statute but there is a valid arbitration clause, courts can appoint an alternative arbitration centre in the interest of giving effect to the parties' intention to settle their dispute through arbitration and to ensure there are no delays in appointing an arbitrator.
Civil Procedure — Procedural Defects — Article 126(2)(c) of the Constitution
Procedural rules are handmaidens of justice and not mistresses of it. Procedural defects that do not go to jurisdiction may be cured under Article 126(2)(c) of the Constitution where no prejudice is demonstrated. The use of a Chamber Summons instead of a Notice of Motion for an application under Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, though not ideal, is not fatal to the application.
Arbitration & ADR — Interim Measures — Status Quo
For purposes of interim measures under Section 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, status quo includes not only physical circumstances but also financial and legal positions, such as demand notices or enforcement steps. Allowing enforcement proceedings to continue may irreversibly alter a party's position, and there is therefore a status quo to maintain.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (6)

  • Bank One Ltd v Simbamanyo Estates Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 645 of 2020)
  • Norah Nakiiridde Namuandu v Hotel International Ltd [1987] HCB 85
  • Sirasi Bitaitana & Others v Emmanuel Kananura (Civil Appeal No. 47 of 1976)
  • Zhonghao Overseas Construction Engineering Co v AG & 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1955 of 2023)
  • Guangdong Hua Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd v Britain Insurance
  • Mwatunga Didas v Finca Uganda Ltd

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Pharmaceutical Society Of Uganda v Gabikan Engineering Limited (Miscellaneous Cause 33 of 2025) [2026] UGCommC 229 (6 March 2026)
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.