EA Development Bank v Blenders Uganda Limited (Civil Suit 306 of 1993)
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 novation occurred when the decree holder accepted a third party's offer to assume the judgment debtor's liability and pay the debt over six months. The judgment debtor was discharged from payment once the creditor elected to look to the third party for payment. Accordingly, the judgment decree became incapable of execution against the original debtor, the warrant of attachment dated 26 October 1993 was vacated, and the attached vehicles were ordered released. Application allowed with costs to the applicant.
Outcome
Warrant of attachment vacated and attached vehicles released to the applicant/defendant.
Facts
The plaintiff obtained a decree against the defendant for UGX 60,241,924 inclusive of costs. A warrant of attachment was issued and executed, resulting in the attachment of a coffee huller and a lorry. Before public auction, a third party, N.G. General Limited (which had been renting the coffee huller from the defendant), approached the plaintiff's advocates and offered to buy the coffee huller from the defendant and pay the judgment debt over six months using post-dated cheques. The plaintiff accepted these terms on 12 July 1993 and instructed the court bailiff to release the attached properties. The court bailiff returned the warrant as fully executed and paid a balance of UGX 10,000,000 to the defendant. One of the third party's cheques was honoured, but others were dishonoured. The plaintiff then sought fresh attachment, leading the defendant to apply for stay of the new warrant and release of newly attached vehicles.
Issues
- Whether the judgment decree had been satisfied by the execution process involving the sale of the coffee huller to a third party.
- Whether there was a valid novation extinguishing the judgment debtor's liability and substituting a third party as the new debtor.
- Whether the warrant of attachment and sale dated 26 October 1993 should be stayed and the attached vehicles released.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Warrant of attachment and sale of moveable property dated 26 October 1993 vacated.
- Any property attached in pursuance of the said warrant to be released immediately.
- Costs of the application awarded to the applicants.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.2(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.2(2)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.64
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.70(1)
Cases cited (6)
- Sejiakula vs Musoke and 2 Others
- Scarf v Jardine (1882) 7 App Cas 345
- Tolhurst v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1902) 2 KB 166
- Pabari v Shah (1961) EA 677
- Kamtirudin Mohamed vs Jinja Co-op. Society 1957
- Manji Khodabhai v Sing [1957] EA 291
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.