Auto One Spares & Accessories Ltd v Equity Bank Uganda Ltd (Civil Suit No. 653 of 2023)
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 the plaintiff's application for relief against foreclosure under section 33 of the Mortgage Act. The plaintiff had defaulted on two restructured loan facilities totalling UGX 3.65 billion secured by mortgage over two properties. The court held that granting the plaintiff an additional year to sell the mortgaged properties without bank control was unreasonable and prejudicial to depositors, particularly where the loan had already been restructured once and the plaintiff had failed to meet obligations for over two years since the default notice.
Outcome
Suit dismissed with costs to the Defendant
Facts
The plaintiff obtained two loan facilities from the defendant bank: UGX 3 billion on 22 January 2019 and UGX 650 million on 25 September 2019, secured by mortgage over two properties in Kampala. The loans were repayable in 120 monthly instalments. Due to COVID-19, the facilities were restructured on 8 June 2020 with a six-month moratorium. The plaintiff subsequently defaulted on repayments. The defendant issued a notice of default on 21 September 2022 and a notice of sale on 28 December 2022. The plaintiff filed suit on 19 July 2023 seeking relief against foreclosure, requesting one year to sell the properties independently and pay off the loan. The plaintiff admitted during cross-examination that no payments had been made since the default notice over two years prior.
Issues
- Whether the Plaintiff in the given circumstances is entitled to an order of relief against foreclosure?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- The suit is dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (9)
- Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited v Dahable Uganda Limited & Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 93 of 2023)
- National and Provincial Society Vs LIoyd [1996]1 ALLER 630
- Steel Rolling Mills Ltd & 3 Others v Standard Chartered Bank (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 829 of 2015)
- Maithya Vs Housing Finance Company of Kenya & Anor [2003] 1 EA 133
- Senkungu & 4 Others v Mukasa (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2014)
- Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (SCCA No. 28 of 1993)
- Housing Finance Bank Ltd & Another v Edward Musisi (Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2010)
- Payne Vs Cardiff Rural Urban Council [1932] K.B 254
- Ushillani v Kampala Pharmaceuticals Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1998)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.