Wakilii

Alemayehu v Bowerman (Civil Suit 484 of 1993)

High Court · [1993] UGHC 57 · 1993 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ex parte application for leave to serve summons outside jurisdiction
Decision
Application for leave to serve summons outside jurisdiction dismissed

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The court dismissed an ex parte application for leave to serve summons outside Uganda. The applicant failed to satisfy Order 5 rule 23(c) because the defendant was ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, not within the court's jurisdiction. The rule requires the defendant be domiciled or ordinarily resident within the jurisdiction but temporarily outside it. The applicant also failed to disclose sufficient particulars to establish a good cause of action as required under Order 5 rule 25.

Outcome

Application for leave to serve summons outside jurisdiction dismissed

Facts

The plaintiff claimed the defendant, who carried on business in both Uganda and the United Kingdom, contracted in 1992 to supply shoes worth US$6,981.63. On the defendant's instructions, the plaintiff paid the purchase price to the defendant's agent Martin Sharman and received acknowledgment. The defendant promised to ship the goods after payment but failed to do so despite numerous demands. The plaintiff filed suit under Summary Procedure seeking recovery of the contract price. The defendant was ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom with an office at Kennington High Street, Kensington London W8. The plaintiff applied ex parte for leave to serve summons on the defendant in the United Kingdom.

Issues

  1. Whether leave should be granted for service of summons on the defendant outside the jurisdiction of the court in the United Kingdom.
  2. Whether the applicant satisfied the requirements of Order 5 rule 23(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  3. Whether the applicant disclosed a good cause of action under Order 5 rule 25.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Service Outside Jurisdiction — Order 5 rule 23(c)
Under Order 5 rule 23(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules, service out of jurisdiction may be allowed when the defendant is domiciled or ordinarily resident within the court's jurisdiction but happens to be outside the jurisdiction at the time of service, not when the defendant is ordinarily resident outside the jurisdiction.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Applications — Duty of Full Disclosure
In an ex parte application for leave to serve summons outside jurisdiction, the applicant is under a duty to disclose to the court full particulars on which the claim is based to enable the court to determine whether a good cause of action exists, especially where the action is brought under summary procedure.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Civil Procedure Rules Or. 5 r. 23(c)
  • Civil Procedure Rules Or. 5 r. 25
  • Civil Procedure Rules Or. 33 r. 2

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Alemayehu v Bowerman (Civil Suit 484 of 1993) [1993] UGHC 57 (23 November 1993)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.