)
)
A London-based international arbitration tribunal has dismissed all claims brought against the government of Uganda by Rift Valley Railways (RVR), a company that previously ran the country’s railway system.
The tribunal issued its Final Award on July 22, 2025, bringing to a close a protracted arbitration that commenced on April 2, 2020.
The case, heard by a three-member tribunal in London in March 2024, involved claims exceeding US$2.3 billion (approximately Shs 8.2 trillion) from RVR Investments (Pty) Ltd (RVRI) and UK Railways Holdings Limited (KURH).
These entities, as investors and ultimate concession holders in the Kenya and Uganda railway concessions, had initiated arbitration against both the Republic of Kenya and the Republic of Uganda, alleging breach of agreements related to the Meter Gauge Railway (MGR) line.
)
)
)
RVR's Claims of Repudiation and Hidden Intentions Rejected
RVR had sought substantial compensation, alleging that the governments of Kenya and Uganda failed to harmonise operational standards across the two countries.
They claimed that adverse impacts were caused by the development of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR), which they argued amounted to a repudiation of agreements.
Rift Valley Railways (RVR)
RVR further asserted that the SGR plans, coupled with a perceived inducement and an insufficient investment, demonstrated a hidden intention to retire the MGR.
However, after a lengthy hearing and a comprehensive review of the evidence presented by all parties, the Tribunal rejected all of RVR's claims.
The Tribunal specifically found that Uganda was not in breach of its harmonisation obligations, as had been alleged. Crucially, the Tribunal concluded that the Uganda Concession Agreement was terminated for a multitude of independent reasons stemming from RVR's own shortcomings.
Uganda's Stance Vindicated, Legal Costs Awarded
Uganda consistently maintained throughout the proceedings that it had not breached its contractual obligations.
The nation argued that RVR's own mismanagement, underperformance, and failure to meet agreed freight volume targets and maintenance commitments were the direct causes leading to the termination of the concession.
The Tribunal's decision to dismiss all claims against Uganda unequivocally supports this firm position, underscoring that the termination of the concession was lawful, justified, and necessary to protect a critical national infrastructure asset.
As a further vindication, the Tribunal ordered RVR to pay Uganda US$3,668,519.25 in legal costs and GBP 200,369.11 in arbitration costs. Uganda was represented in the arbitration by the Attorney General’s Chambers, alongside Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP, and K&K Advocates.