Zhou Qingyou claimed he advanced the funds to facilitate the shipment of 100 kilograms of gold to China, which was reportedly never delivered. In response, Core Minerals and its directors contested the suit, citing an arbitration clause in their agency agreement that mandates disputes be settled under the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
Justice Mutesi ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case due to the existence of this arbitration clause. She emphasized that the parties must adhere to their contractual obligations regarding dispute resolution. Additionally, she struck out Zhou’s affidavit in reply for being improperly commissioned, noting that it was sworn in Nairobi and lacked proper notarization.
The ruling underscores the enforceability of arbitration clauses in commercial agreements and highlights the importance of adhering to established dispute resolution mechanisms. Legal experts suggest that this decision may set a precedent for future cases involving international contracts and arbitration.
As Uganda continues to grapple with issues related to gold-related fraud, this case serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in international trade agreements and the necessity for clear legal frameworks to protect all parties involved.