In a significant ruling, the High Court of Uganda’s Commercial Division has dismissed a summary suit filed by Flutterwave, Inc. against True African (U) Limited, citing a lack of jurisdiction due to the arbitration clause in the parties’ original agreements.
The case stemmed from a claim by Flutterwave seeking UGX 517,781,538.69, allegedly owed by True African under a Bulk Collection and Payment Agreement signed in 2018. Flutterwave argued that delays in settlements led to the dispute, which escalated despite attempts at resolution. Flutterwave claimed the dispute fell outside the arbitration clause because it was based on a subsequent payment plan proposed by True African in June 2023.
True African, however, challenged the competence of the suit, asserting that the original agreements required disputes to be resolved through arbitration, not litigation. True African also argued that the payment plan email cited by Flutterwave did not constitute a binding agreement.
Presiding over the matter, Hon. Lady Justice Patricia Mutesi sided with True African, holding that the arbitration clause in the 2018 agreements remained valid and binding. The court rejected Flutterwave’s argument that the payment plan was a separate contract, ruling it was merely an attempt to settle outstanding obligations under the original agreements.
Pearl Bank Celebrates Customers in Festive Campaign Dubbed Pearl Santa“The dispute concerns enforcement of payment obligations and squarely falls within the scope of the arbitration clause in the parties’ agreements. This court, therefore, lacks jurisdiction to entertain the case under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,” Justice Mutesi stated in her ruling.
As a result, the court struck off the case and dismissed True African’s related application as moot. Justice Mutesi also awarded costs of the application and the summary suit to True African.
The decision underscores the enforceability of arbitration clauses in commercial agreements and serves as a reminder of the court’s limited jurisdiction in matters covered by arbitration provisions.
