Select Garments Limited v Old Stanley Hotel Limited (Civil Suit 674 of 2014)
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
Held that the defendant waived its right to arbitration by actively participating in court proceedings for over nine years, filing a defence and counterclaim, and never raising the arbitration clause until the hearing of the defence case on 1 December 2023. The arbitration agreement became inoperative under Section 5(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A party may abandon its right to arbitrate through delay or by commencing and participating in court proceedings. The preliminary objection was overruled and the suit ordered to proceed to conclusion.
Outcome
Matter to proceed to trial on the merits
Facts
Civil Suit No. 674 of 2014 was instituted by the plaintiff arising from alleged breach of a tenancy agreement. The matter was filed in 2014 and both parties actively participated in court proceedings including mediation, conferencing, and interlocutory applications. The defendant filed an amended defence and counterclaim on 11 May 2016. The tenancy agreement between the parties contained an arbitration clause (clause 38.3) providing that disputes unresolved after 30 days should be referred to arbitration under UNCITRAL Rules with the London Court of International Arbitration as appointing authority. On 1 December 2023, when the matter came up for hearing of the defence case, counsel for the defendant raised a preliminary objection that the suit was bad in law because it was founded on an agreement containing an arbitration clause and should be referred to arbitration.
Issues
- Whether Civil Suit No. 674 of 2014 should be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?
Orders
- Preliminary objection overruled.
- Suit to proceed to its conclusion.
- Suit fixed for cross examination of the defendant's witness on 27 February 2024 at 9am.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (12)
- Omugabe Mbabazi Sam v Tumwesigye Dan (Civil Misc. Application No. 10 of 2023)
- Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership v Simba Properties Investment Co. Ltd and Anor (Misc. Application No. 201 of 2020)
- Agri-Industrial Management Agency Ltd v Kayonza Growers Tea Factory Ltd & Anor (HCCS No. 819 of 2004)
- Morgan Vs Sundance Inc. decided on 23rd May 2022
- Heyam and Another v Darwins Ltd [1942] 1 All ER 337
- Premium Nafta Products Ltd and others v Fili Shipping Company Ltd and others [2007] UKHL 40
- Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation v Privalov [2008] 1 Lloyd's Rep 254
- Broken Hill City Council v Unique Urban Built Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 825
- Lucky-Goldstar International (HK) Ltd v NG Moo Kee Engineering Ltd [1993] HKCFI 14
- Bulkbuild Pty Ltd v Fortuna Well Pty Ltd & Ors [2019] QSC 173
- Yan Jian Uganda Company Ltd v Siwa Builders and Engineers (H.C. Misc. Application No. 1147 of 2014)
- National Social Security Fund v Alcon International Ltd (CA No. 2 of 2008)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.