Wakilii

Dr. Charles Ekure v Henry Mwanga and Bank of Baroda (Miscellaneous Application 328 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 510 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside default judgment and garnishee order absolute arising from Civil Suit No. 072 of 2024
Decision
Default judgment and garnishee orders set aside; applicant granted unconditional leave to defend; garnished funds to be refunded pending determination of main suit

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 set aside a default judgment and garnishee order absolute where the defendant was never properly served with summons. The court held that service by a private process server attached to the plaintiff's law firm, which was not rebutted and was questioned by the Chief Inspector of Courts, was ineffective. The defendant demonstrated good cause and raised triable issues warranting unconditional leave to defend.

Outcome

Default judgment and garnishee orders set aside; applicant granted unconditional leave to defend; garnished funds to be refunded pending determination of main suit

Facts

Dr. Charles Ekure was sued by Henry Mwanja in Civil Suit No. 072 of 2024 before the High Court at Jinja. A default judgment was entered against him for non-appearance, and a garnishee order absolute was issued attaching UGX 260,370,000 from his account with Bank of Baroda. On 21 December 2024, Ekure received notification from the bank that this sum had been debited and transferred to an account held by Nabaasa Alex, counsel for the plaintiff. Ekure denied knowledge of the suit and claimed he was never served with summons. The purported service was by a private process server attached to the plaintiff's law firm, not a court process server. Upon complaint, the bank froze the funds and reported suspected fraud to police and the Financial Intelligence Authority. Nabaasa Alex was arrested when he attempted to withdraw the funds. The Chief Inspector of Courts investigated and questioned the validity of service.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses sufficient cause to warrant the setting aside of the default judgment and decree.
  2. Whether the application discloses triable issues that merit the grant of leave to appear and defend.

Orders

  • The default judgment/decree in HCCS 72 of 2024 is hereby set aside.
  • The garnishee order nisi and absolute issued against the applicant's bank account is hereby set aside.
  • The sum of money previously garnished from the applicant's account in the 2nd respondent bank pursuant to the said garnishee proceedings shall be refunded to the applicant forthwith pending the hearing and determination of the main suit.
  • The applicant is granted unconditional leave to appear and defend within 14 days from the date of this Ruling.
  • Costs be awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Setting Aside Default Judgment — Service of Summons — Effectiveness of Service
A default judgment may be set aside where the defendant demonstrates that service of summons was not effective, constituting good cause under Order 36 rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Private Process Servers — Duty of Due Diligence
Where summons are purportedly served by a private process server attached to the plaintiff's law firm rather than a court process server, the court must exercise due diligence to verify that effective service was actually made before entering default judgment.
Civil Procedure — Affidavit Evidence — Unrebutted Averments — Presumption of Acceptance
Where facts are sworn to in an affidavit and are not denied or rebutted by the opposite party, the presumption is that the facts are accepted.
Civil Procedure — Leave to Defend — Test for Granting Leave — Triable Issues
A defendant is entitled to unconditional leave to defend where the court is satisfied that the defendant has raised a genuine triable issue and not a sham or frivolous issue. The defendant need not show a good defence on the merits, but must demonstrate that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried.
Civil Procedure — Garnishee Orders — Setting Aside — Defective Underlying Judgment
A garnishee order absolute must be set aside where the underlying default judgment is set aside for want of proper service, and the garnished funds must be refunded to the judgment debtor pending determination of the main suit.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (9)

  • Lydia Naiga v Ask Services Limited (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 482 of 2012)
  • Attorney General v Wazuri Medicare Limited (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 283 of 2023)
  • Samwiri Massa v Rose Achen [1978] HCB 297
  • Khanti Dhanji t/a Lube Enterprises Ltd [1993] MKALR 54
  • Post Bank (U) Ltd v Abdu Ssozi (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2015)
  • Maluku Interglobal Agency Ltd v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • Francis Butagira v Deborah Mukasa (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1989)
  • Uganda Development Bank v Muganga Construction Company [1981] HCB 35
  • Sutherland vs. Canada (Attorney General) 2008 BCCA 27

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

↓ Download PDF

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

Dr. Charles Ekure v Henry Mwanga and Bank of Baroda (Miscellaneous Application 328 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 510 (24 June 2025)
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.