Court upholds sh319.6m award against Roko
Justice Thomas Ocaya also ordered that the final arbitral award, issued on November 20, 2024, be recognised as binding on the parties and enforced in the same manner as a decree of the court.
Court upholds sh319.6m award against Roko
_______________
The High Court in Kampala has dismissed an application by Roko Construction Limited seeking to set aside an arbitral award requiring it to pay Senaca (U) Limited more than sh319.6 million over a dispute arising from security services.
Justice Thomas Ocaya also ordered that the final arbitral award, issued on November 20, 2024, be recognised as binding on the parties and enforced in the same manner as a decree of the court.
Court documents indicate that former Chief Justice Bart Katureebe, who was appointed as the sole arbitrator by the parties, awarded Senaca sh199.6 million in outstanding fees for security services and sh120 million in general damages.
Roko was also awarded sh10 million in general damages on its counterclaim. The arbitrator further directed the parties to share the arbitration costs, with Senaca meeting 90% and Roko 10%.
The dispute arose from a 2015 agreement under which Senaca was contracted to provide unarmed security guards at Roko’s sites and locations.
The parties subsequently agreed to have the dispute resolved through arbitration.
Roko challenged the award before the High Court, arguing, among other grounds, that the arbitrator had exceeded his jurisdiction, was evidently partial and had made an award that conflicted with Uganda’s public policy.
Roko also challenged the award of general damages, arguing that the arbitrator had dealt with matters outside the scope of the reference.
However, Justice Ocaya rejected the arguments, holding that the court was not sitting as an appellate court over the arbitrator’s decision.
The judge noted that there was no agreement between the parties to refer a question of law to the High Court as provided under Section 38(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
He also found that Roko had not demonstrated that the reasons given by the arbitrator for awarding the damages were perverse or based on wrong propositions of law.
He found that the difference between the general damages awarded to the two parties did not establish evident partiality because the parties had suffered different losses.
The judge noted that Senaca’s sh120 million award arose from unpaid contractual invoices that had remained outstanding for about four years. The arbitrator had found that Senaca was deprived of income and, in some instances, had paid VAT on e-invoices before receiving payment from Roko.
In contrast, Roko had received credit notes for instances where fewer guards were deployed and had been compensated sh20 million for lost items. It had also failed to prove further financial loss.
The judge also rejected Roko’s complaint that the arbitrator had relied on insufficient evidence to find that Senaca had deployed guards. He said the arbitrator had considered security register sheets, tax invoices and witness evidence before making the finding.
Justice Ocaya further dismissed the public policy challenge, saying Roko had failed to provide sufficient particulars or evidence showing that the award was inconsistent with Uganda’s Constitution or laws, against the national interest, or contrary to justice and morality.
The court dismissed Roko’s application and awarded costs to Senaca.