Democratic Governance Facility v Sebei Diocese Community Development & 4 Others (Miscellaneous Application 973 of 2023)
Observed later treatment
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 substitution of a party is permissible under Order 1 Rule 13 and Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act even where the original party has ceased operations, provided the application was filed while that party was still in existence and a lawfully empowered entity is available to continue the proceedings. The court distinguished the situation from cases involving parties who were non-existent from the start. The Kingdom of Denmark was substituted as plaintiff in place of the Democratic Governance Facility, whose mandate had expired.
Outcome
Substitution granted; Kingdom of Denmark to prosecute suit in place of Democratic Governance Facility
Facts
The Democratic Governance Facility (DGF), a programme funded by multiple development partners including the Austrian Development Corporation Agency, the Embassies of Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, and the EU Delegation, filed Civil Suit No. 956 of 2020. DGF's mandate expired on 30 June 2023. By an addendum executed on 21 June 2023, the programme partners agreed to close DGF on 30 June 2023 and appointed the Kingdom of Denmark to take over responsibility for all unresolved matters, including pending court cases. On 29 June 2023, DGF applied to substitute the Kingdom of Denmark as plaintiff in the pending suit. The respondents opposed, arguing that DGF no longer existed, that assets sought in the suit had been recovered, and that the Kingdom of Denmark had previously been struck off the suit.
Issues
- Whether the Democratic Governance Facility could properly apply for substitution given the cessation of its operations.
- Whether the Kingdom of Denmark should be substituted as plaintiff in place of the Democratic Governance Facility.
- Whether the previous striking off of the Kingdom of Denmark from the suit bars its substitution as plaintiff.
- Whether an intention to apply for security for costs affects the determination of a substitution application.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Leave granted to substitute the Democratic Governance Facility with the Kingdom of Denmark as Plaintiff in Civil Suit No. 956 of 2020.
- Amended plaint reflecting the substitution to be filed and served within 15 days from the date of the ruling.
- Amended defence reflecting the substitution to be filed and served within 15 days from the date of service of the amended plaint.
- Amended reply to defence (if any) reflecting the substitution to be filed and served within 10 days from the date of service of the amended defence.
- The Kingdom of Denmark or its counsel to take necessary steps to set the suit down for hearing.
- Costs in cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (10)
- Rajab Mudaki & Ors v Best Kemigisha & Anor (HCMA No. 90 of 2021)
- Walimu Cooperative Savings and Credit Union v Okumu Benjamin & Anor (HCMA No. 101 of 2022)
- Jethro Jones Opolot & Ors v Attorney General (HCMA No. 687 of 2021)
- Vastina Kyarisima v Josephine Abaasa (HCMA No. 500 of 2021)
- Mucunguzi Edgar & Anor v Atukunda Brenda & Anor (HCMA No. 116 of 2022)
- Okway John Kimbo v Odida Nuru & Anor (HCMA No. 39 of 2016)
- Green Meadow Limited v Patrice Namisono (HCMA No. 1368 of 2022)
- Kagumaho Musana v Rama and 3 Others (HCMA No. 933 of 2019)
- Tullow Uganda Limited & Anor v Jackson Wabyona & Ors (HCMA No. 443 of 2017)
- Stanbic Bank Limited v Kesacon Services Limited (HCMA No. 724 of 2023)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.