Wakilii

Christine Kyewalabye v Eng Sakwa Darlington [2026] UGHCLD 173

High Court · 2026 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application in execution proceedings seeking determination and payment of interest on a decretal sum, arising from Miscellaneous Application No. 1051 of 2024 and HCCS No. 73 of 2007
Decision
Interest on the decretal sum determined at 6% per annum and fixed at UGX 58,987,500; applicant's claim for 18% per annum rejected

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 where a decree orders payment of interest at 'court rate' without stating a specific rate, section 26(3) of the Civil Procedure Act applies and interest is deemed to run at 6% per annum, not 18% as the applicant contended. Computing interest on the decretal sum of UGX 75,000,000 at 6% per annum from the date of judgment (28 April 2009) until payment into court, the court fixed the total interest payable at UGX 58,987,500. Upon payment of the decretal sum together with that interest, the earlier order permitting execution of the consent judgment would take effect. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Outcome

Interest on the decretal sum determined at 6% per annum and fixed at UGX 58,987,500; applicant's claim for 18% per annum rejected

Facts

In Miscellaneous Application No. 1051 of 2024, arising from HCCS No. 73 of 2007, the court ordered the respondent to pay interest on the decretal sum at court rate from the date of judgment until payment in full. The parties could not agree on the amount of interest payable. The applicant then brought this application contending that the court had not categorically declared a rate, that the respondent had unilaterally computed interest at 6% per annum arriving at about UGX 58 million, and sought interest at 18% per annum from 28 April 2009. The respondent opposed the application by affidavit in reply and asked that it be dismissed with costs. The decretal sum was UGX 75,000,000, judgment was entered on 28 April 2009, and the respondent paid the full decretal sum into court on the orders of the deputy registrar in 2022.

Issues

  1. What rate of interest is payable where the court ordered interest on a decretal sum at 'court rate' without specifying the rate.
  2. What total amount of interest is payable on the decretal sum from the date of judgment until payment in full.

Orders

  • The total amount of interest payable is UGX 58,987,500.
  • As already ordered in Miscellaneous Application No. 1051 of 2024, upon payment of the entire decretal sum plus interest, the respondent shall be at liberty to execute the consent judgment.
  • Each party shall meet their own costs of this application.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Decrees for Payment of Money — Interest at 'Court Rate' — Statutory Default of 6% per annum
Where a decree for payment of money orders interest at court rate without specifying a rate, section 26(3) of the Civil Procedure Act operates and the court is deemed to have ordered interest at 6% per year; a party cannot claim a higher rate such as 18% per annum in the absence of an express order.
Civil Procedure — Execution — Court's Power to Compute and Fix Interest on a Decretal Sum
Where parties disagree on the quantum of interest payable under a decree, the court may, on application, compute and fix the precise sum by applying the applicable rate to the principal sum from the date of judgment to the date of payment in full.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Method of Computation on a Decretal Sum over a Period of Years, Months and Days
Interest on a decretal sum is computed by applying the annual rate to the principal to obtain the yearly figure, apportioning that figure to monthly and daily amounts, and aggregating the amounts attributable to the complete years, months and days between the date of judgment and the date of payment.

Legislation cited (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Christine Kyewalabye v Eng Sakwa Darlington [2026] UGHCLD 173 (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.