Wakilii

Anguandia Jershem Moses Sunday and Another v Jubilee Finance Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 25 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 846 · 2026 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appear and defend a summary suit for recovery of loan money
Decision
Applicants granted conditional leave to defend — must deposit UGX 49,000,000 within one month; second applicant remains a party as guarantor

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 High Court granted the applicants conditional leave to appear and defend a summary suit for loan recovery. The court found that the applicants raised a triable issue regarding the legality of interest charges under the Tier 4 Microfinance Financial Institutions and Money Lenders Act s.90(2). Leave was granted only on condition that the applicants pay UGX 49,000,000 (the undisputed principal amount less admitted repayments) within one month. The court held that the second applicant, as guarantor, remains liable until the main suit is resolved.

Outcome

Applicants granted conditional leave to defend — must deposit UGX 49,000,000 within one month; second applicant remains a party as guarantor

Facts

The first applicant obtained a business loan of UGX 57,393,000 from the respondent on 21 February 2024. The loan agreement stipulated a 5% monthly interest rate. The first applicant made partial repayments totalling UGX 8,000,000 but defaulted on the repayment schedule. The second applicant executed a guarantor deed making herself jointly and severally liable. The respondent filed Civil Suit No. 0013 of 2025 seeking recovery of UGX 80,000,000 (principal plus interest). The applicants sought leave to appear and defend, alleging that the loan agreement charged illegal and excessive interest rates contrary to the Tier 4 Microfinance Financial Institutions and Money Lenders Act s.90(2). The first applicant admitted the principal debt but disputed the interest calculation. The respondent opposed the application, stating that the interest rate was mutually agreed and disclosed before execution of the loan agreement.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicants should be granted leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 0013 of 2025.
  2. What are the remedies available to the parties?

Orders

  • The Applicants are granted leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 0013 of 2025, but only with respect to the legality of the interest charged.
  • Leave to defend is conditional upon the Applicants paying UGX 49,000,000 (Forty-Nine Million Uganda Shillings Only) within one month from the date of this Ruling.
  • The 2nd Applicant shall remain a party to the dispute between the 1st Applicant and the Respondent until the main suit is heard and disposed of.
  • Costs of the Application shall abide the outcome of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Appear and Defend — Test for Granting Leave
An applicant seeking leave to appear and defend a summary suit must show that there is a bona fide triable issue of fact or law. The applicant need not show a good defence on the merits but must satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried. The court shall not enter upon the trial of issues disclosed at the stage of the application for leave.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Appear and Defend — Defence Must Be Stated with Particularity
The defence raised in an application for leave to appear and defend must be stated with sufficient particularity to appear genuine. General or vague statements denying liability will not suffice. The applicant cannot merely rely on conclusions of law but must set out actual evidence, and the triable issue must be one that is subject to judicial examination in court.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Conditional Leave to Defend — Court's Discretion to Impose Conditions
Where a defendant raises a triable issue but admits part of the plaintiff's claim, the court may grant conditional leave to appear and defend, requiring the defendant to deposit in court the undisputed portion of the claim before being allowed to defend the disputed portion.
Contract Law — Loan Agreements — Legality of Interest Rates — Triable Issue
An allegation that a loan agreement charges illegal or excessive interest rates contrary to statute constitutes a triable issue warranting leave to defend. However, borrowers cannot avoid liability for the principal sum borrowed and must deposit the undisputed principal (less admitted repayments) as a condition for leave to defend the disputed interest component.
Contract Law — Guarantees — Liability of Guarantor — Secondary Liability
A guarantor is a person or entity that legally promises to repay a loan or debt if the primary borrower defaults. Under the law of contract, a guarantee creates a secondary liability, and the guarantor acts as an additional layer of security. The guarantor steps into the borrower's shoes if the borrower fails to meet loan obligations. Until the main suit determining the primary borrower's liability is heard and disposed of, the guarantor remains a party to the dispute.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (7)

  • Africa One Logistics Ltd v Kazi Food Logistics (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 964 of 2019)
  • Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • MMK Engineering v Mantrust Uganda Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 128 of 2021)
  • Bhaker Kotecha v Adum Muhammed [2002] 1 EA 112
  • Roko Construction Co Ltd v Ruhweza Transportation & Construction Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 831 of 2021)
  • Jamil Ssenyonjo v Jonathan Bunjo (Civil Suit No. 180 of 2012)
  • VS Hydro Uganda Ltd and 3 Others v UAP Old Mutual Insurance Uganda Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 2493 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Anguandia Jershem Moses Sunday and Another v Jubilee Finance Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 25 of 2025) [2026] UGHC 846 (27 July 2026)
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.