UGANDA Law and Practice Contributed by: Moses J. Adriko SC, Ernest Sembatya Kaggwa, Derrick Kizito Kunyiga and Philip E. Nsaja, MMAKS Advocates
contract is treated as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract, and a decision by the arbitral tribunal that the contract is null and void does not of itself invalidate the arbitration clause. The tribu - nal may therefore rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections to the existence or validity of the arbitra - tion agreement, and the Ugandan courts consistently apply the rule so that allegations that the main contract is void, voidable or terminated do not defeat the refer- ence to arbitration. The principle has been applied in a number of judicial decisions, for example, Kibo Media Ltd v Nile Breweries Ltd [2026] UGCommC 325. The same premise underlies the jurisdictional analyses in Bemuga Forwarders Ltd v Sany International [2024] UGCommC 104 and S mile Communications Uganda Ltd v ATC Uganda Ltd [2023] UGCommC 30. Party autonomy in the selection of arbitrators is virtu - ally unlimited. The parties are free to determine the number of arbitrators (Section 10 of the ACA) and to agree on the appointment procedure (Section 11). There are no nationality, residency, gender, religious or professional qualification requirements: an arbitra - tor need not be a Ugandan national or a lawyer. The only mandatory constraints are that arbitrators must be independent and impartial and must possess any qualifications the parties have agreed (Section 12); an appointing authority making a default appointment must have due regard to those agreed qualifications and to considerations likely to secure an independent and impartial arbitrator. 4.2 Default Procedures 4. The Arbitral Tribunal 4.1 Limits on Selection If the parties have not agreed on the number of arbi - trators, the default under Section 10 (2) of the ACA is a sole arbitrator. Under Section 11, failing an agreed appointment procedure: • in an arbitration with three arbitrators, each party appoints one arbitrator, and the two party-appoint - ed arbitrators appoint the presiding arbitrator; if a party or the co-arbitrators’ default, the appoint - ment is made by the appointing authority on the application of a party; and
• in an arbitration with a sole arbitrator, if the parties cannot agree, the arbitrator is appointed by the appointing authority on the application of a party. The gazetted appointing authorities are ICAMEK and the CADER department within the Ministry of Jus - tice and Constitutional Affairs. The ACA contains no bespoke default procedure for multiparty arbitrations; in practice, the gap is filled by the applicable institu - tional rules. 4.3 Court Intervention The default appointment function is vested in the appointing authority rather than the courts, and Sec - tion 9 of the ACA bars court intervention except as provided therein. The courts therefore do not ordinar - ily select arbitrators. They have, however, intervened to keep the appointment machinery working where it would otherwise fail: during the transition following the 2024 abolition of CADER as an autonomous body, the High Court upheld and gave effect to appointments through ICAMEK as a gazetted appointing authority ( LABX Scientific Ltd v Katakwi District Local Govern - ment , 2025), preventing the institutional reform from being used to frustrate arbitration agreements. Any such intervention is limited: the court cannot override a valid appointment procedure agreed by the parties, and decisions of the appointing authority on appoint - ments and challenges are final and not subject to appeal. 4.4 Challenge and Removal of Arbitrators Sections 12 to 14 of the ACA govern the challenge or removal of arbitrators. An arbitrator may be chal - lenged only if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality or independ - ence, or if they do not possess qualifications agreed by the parties (Section 12 (3)). A party may challenge an arbitrator it appointed only for reasons of which it became aware after the appointment. As to procedure (Section 13), the parties are free to agree a challenge procedure. Failing agreement, the challenging party must submit a written statement of the reasons to the appointing authority within 15 days of becoming aware of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal or of the relevant circumstances. Unless the challenged arbitrator withdraws or the other party
1069 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook