Wakilii

Alpha International Investment Limited v Akida (Miscellaneous Application No.88 of 2004)

High Court · [2005] UGHC 7 · 2005 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from Magistrate's Court judgment arising from civil suit to recover balance on dishonoured cheque
Decision
Plaintiff's suit dismissed as disclosing no cause of action

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

Held that the plaintiff, not being the holder of the cheque within the meaning of the Bills of Exchange Act, had no cause of action to sue on it. Further, no notice of dishonour was given or pleaded, which discharged the defendant on both the cheque and any antecedent obligation. The suit was also an abuse of court process as it attempted to recover a decretal sum already under execution. Appeal allowed and plaintiff's suit dismissed.

Outcome

Plaintiff's suit dismissed as disclosing no cause of action

Facts

In execution of a judgment in Civil Suit No. 655 of 2001, judgment debtor Taban Issa was committed to civil prison to recover Shs. 573,000. Advocate Alli Gabe Akida issued a personal cheque to M/s Basaza Wasswa & Co Advocates for the judgment creditor, on the basis of which Taban Issa was released. The cheque was dishonoured. The advocate paid Shs. 325,000 in cash, leaving a balance of Shs. 248,000. Alpha International Investments Limited, the judgment creditor, brought Civil Suit No. 110 of 2004 against the advocate to recover the Shs. 248,000 balance. The Magistrate's Court ruled in favour of the plaintiff. The advocate appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff, not being the drawee or holder of the cheque, had a cause of action to sue on the dishonoured cheque.
  2. Whether the absence of notice of dishonour, pleaded in the plaint, barred the plaintiff's claim on the bill.
  3. Whether the suit constituted an abuse of court process as it sought to recover a decretal sum already under execution.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Order of the Magistrate set aside.
  • Plaintiff's suit dismissed.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Bills of Exchange — Holder of Cheque — Standing to Sue
A plaintiff who is not the holder of a cheque within the meaning of the Bills of Exchange Act has no cause of action to sue on the cheque.
Bills of Exchange — Notice of Dishonour — Requirement to Plead
Where no notice of dishonour is given and pleaded in the plaint, the plaintiff cannot sustain a suit on a bill of exchange, and the defendant is discharged not only on the cheque but also on any antecedent obligation.
Abuse of Process — Suit to Recover Decretal Sum Already Under Execution
A suit brought to recover a decretal sum already under execution by suing on a cheque issued in connection with that execution constitutes an abuse of court process and is frivolous and vexatious.
Consideration — Liability on Cheque Issued Without Consideration
An advocate who issues a cheque without receiving value or consideration is not liable either on the cheque or in contract for the amount stated in the cheque.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (5)

  • Auto Garage v Moroke (1971) EA 514
  • Arab Bank Ltd v Ross [1951] 2 QB 216
  • Emile Habib Bateekha v Rosen Alam Eddin (1970) 1 ALR 205
  • Dhaneshwer Vajeshanker Metha v Doka Fatuhnal (1951) 18 EACA 126
  • Raichur v Uganda Chemist (Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1956)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Alpha International Investment Limited v Akida (Miscellaneous Application No.88 of 2004) [2005] UGHC 7 (29 June 2005)
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.