Deo W. Kasozi and Another v Makumbi George and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2024)
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 held that the plaint in Civil Suit No. 17 of 2024 did not disclose a cause of action against the defendants. The court found that the dispute concerning alleged unremitted rent from leased property owned by Mirembe Inner Circle Cooperative Savings & Credit Society Limited should have been brought by the society itself as a corporate body, not by individual members. Further, the matter was filed prematurely as it had not been referred to an arbitrator as required under Section 142(1) of the Cooperative Societies Act. The plaint was struck out with costs to the applicants.
Outcome
Plaint struck out for failure to disclose a cause of action and breach of mandatory dispute resolution mechanism
Facts
The applicants and respondents are members of Mirembe Inner Circle Cooperative Savings & Credit Society Limited, a registered cooperative society. The society owns land at Mawokota Block 265 Plot 104 at Nabusanke, which was leased to various tenants. The respondents filed Civil Suit No. 17 of 2024 against the applicants (who served as chairman and treasurer of the society) alleging that they failed to remit full rent proceeds of UGX 339,000,000 to the society, causing economic strain and affecting members' dividends. The applicants filed this application to strike out the plaint, arguing that only the society as a corporate body had standing to sue for recovery of rent, and that the respondents failed to follow the mandatory dispute resolution mechanism under the Cooperative Societies Act requiring referral to an arbitrator before court proceedings.
Issues
- Whether the respondents' plaint in Civil Suit No. 17 of 2024 discloses a cause of action against the applicants.
- Whether Civil Suit No. 17 of 2024 was premature for failure to comply with the mandatory dispute resolution mechanism under the Cooperative Societies Act.
Orders
- The plaint in Civil Suit No. 17 of 2024 is struck out.
- Costs of Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2024 awarded to the applicants.
- Right of appeal explained.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 Rule 30
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 Rule 11
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 Rule 12
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 Rule 19
- Cooperative Societies Act Cap 107 s.32
- Cooperative Societies Act Cap 107 s.63(4)
- Cooperative Societies Act Cap 107 s.115
- Cooperative Societies Act Cap 107 s.142(1)
- Cooperative Societies Act Cap 107 s.153
Cases cited (7)
- Tororo Cement Co Ltd Vs Frokin International Limited
- Kapeka Coffee Works Ltd Vs Non performing Assets Recovery Trust
- Allied Bank International Limited v Sadru Kara and Abdul Kara (Civil Suit No. 191 of 2002)
- Salim Jamal and 2 Others v Uganda Oxygen Ltd and Another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 64 of 1995)
- Foss V Harbottle
- Burland versus Earle (1902) AC 83 at 93
- Ntare Nathan v Kiboga West Livestock Cooperative Society and Paddy Kabejja (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 249 of 2012)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.