Wakilii

Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd v Awor Christine (Miscellaneous Application 2961 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 216 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside interlocutory judgment entered in Civil Suit No. 1139 of 2025
Decision
Interlocutory judgment set aside; matter to proceed to hearing on the merits

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 held that the applicant filed its defence within time under the electronic filing rules, which permit filing until 11:59 p.m. on the due date. Non-payment of filing fees did not invalidate the defence, as the court has discretion under section 97 of the Civil Procedure Act to allow payment at any stage. The interlocutory judgment was improperly entered because the defence was filed in time and the underlying claim was not for pecuniary damages only. The interlocutory judgment was set aside.

Outcome

Interlocutory judgment set aside; matter to proceed to hearing on the merits

Facts

The respondent filed Civil Suit No. 1139 of 2025 against the applicant on 26 September 2025. The applicant was served with summons and plaint on 23 October 2025. The applicant filed a Written Statement of Defence and Counterclaim on 7 November 2025 at 8:00 p.m. via the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS), which was endorsed by the Deputy Registrar on 8 November 2025. The respondent filed an application for interlocutory judgment, which was granted on 24 November 2025. The applicant then applied to set aside the interlocutory judgment, arguing that the defence was filed in time, that non-payment of filing fees did not invalidate the defence, and that the underlying claim was not for pecuniary damages only and therefore did not warrant interlocutory judgment under Order 9 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant filed her Joint Written Statement of Defence in time.
  2. Whether non-payment of filing fees invalidated the applicant's Written Statement of Defence.
  3. Whether the grant of the interlocutory judgment was proper and if not should be set aside.

Orders

  • The Interlocutory Judgment in Civil Suit No. 1139 of 2025 is hereby set aside.
  • The applicant is hereby ordered to pay filing fees for its Written Statement of Defence.
  • Each party should bear its costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Electronic Filing — Computation of Time — Filing Deadline
Under the Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service and Virtual Proceedings) Rules 2025, the deadline for filing any document electronically is 11:59 p.m. East African Standard Time on the day of filing. A document submitted electronically at 8:00 p.m. on the due date is filed in time.
Civil Procedure — Court Fees — Non-Payment — Judicial Discretion
Non-payment of court fees is a procedural error that does not render a document defective. Under section 97 of the Civil Procedure Act, the court has discretion at any stage to allow payment of fees, and upon payment the document has the same force and effect as if the fee had been paid initially.
Civil Procedure — Interlocutory Judgment — Order 9 Rule 8 — Pecuniary Damages
Interlocutory judgment under Order 9 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules may only be entered where the plaint claims pecuniary damages only or detention of goods with or without pecuniary damages, and the defendant fails to file a defence. Where the claim is not for pecuniary damages only, interlocutory judgment is improperly entered.
Civil Procedure — Setting Aside Judgment — Order 9 Rule 12 — Discretion
Under Order 9 rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Order 9 upon such terms as may be just. In exercising this discretion, the court's concern is to do justice between the parties and avoid hardship resulting from accident, inadvertence, excusable mistake or error.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (9)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd v Awor Christine (Miscellaneous Application 2961 of 2025) [2026] UGCommC 216 (30 April 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.