Wakilii

Eligius Co (U) Ltd v Candiru Monica Aka Monika and Another (Miscellaneous Application 83 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 840 · 2026 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Interlocutory application for attachment of property before judgment arising from civil suit for recovery of funds
Decision
Application partially succeeded in so far as the applicant is permitted to attach the 1st respondent's bank account pending determination of the main suit

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 applicant sought to attach the 1st respondent's bank account and other property before judgment, alleging the respondent was concealing assets to frustrate recovery of stolen funds claimed in the main suit. The court held that attachment before judgment requires clear and convincing proof that the order is needed to prevent defeat of justice. The applicant failed to prove the existence of properties in the 1st respondent's name or evidence of transfer to third parties, and provided no evidence the bank account contained funds. Application partially succeeded: the court permitted attachment of the bank account pending determination of the main suit, but rejected wider relief.

Outcome

Application partially succeeded in so far as the applicant is permitted to attach the 1st respondent's bank account pending determination of the main suit

Facts

The applicant company alleged that on 12 June 2024, the 1st respondent, its former employee, stole UGX 483,250,000 comprising USD 8,800 (UGX 33,000,000) and UGX 450,250,000. The applicant filed Civil Suit No. 20 of 2024 to recover the funds. The 1st respondent filed a written statement of defence largely admitting the claim. The applicant alleged the 1st respondent used stolen funds to buy properties, pay loans, and deposit balances in banks including account No. 500222002177 at Finance Trust Bank Arua Branch. The applicant sought to attach this account and other properties, alleging the 1st respondent was concealing and transferring property to frustrate recovery. The 1st respondent countered that the bank account contained no funds as she was unemployed and financially bankrupt, and that the applicant had not identified specific properties to attach.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant satisfied the requirements for attachment of property before judgment under Civil Procedure Act s.64(a).
  2. Whether the applicant discharged the burden of proof to demonstrate that the 1st respondent was concealing or transferring property to defeat the ends of justice.

Orders

  • The Applicant is permitted to attach the 1st Respondent's bank account No. 500222002177 held with Finance Trust Bank pending the hearing and determination of Civil Suit No. 0020 of 2024.
  • The costs of the application shall abide by the outcome of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Burden of Proof — Clear and Convincing Proof Required
The power to attach property before judgment under Civil Procedure Act s.64(a) and Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules is never meant to be exercised lightly or without clear and convincing proof that the order is needed to protect the plaintiff, as such attachment effectively takes away the power of alienation and restricts the undoubted rights of ownership.
Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Purpose — Prevention of Defeat of Justice
The main object of attachment before judgment is to prevent any attempt by the defendant to evade the course of justice and avoid the decree that may be passed, serving as a guarantee against a decree becoming infructuous for want of property from which the plaintiff can satisfy the decree.
Civil Procedure — Burden of Proof — Standard in Civil Cases — Balance of Probabilities
The burden of proof in a civil lawsuit rests on the person who would fail if no evidence were presented, and the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities, requiring evidence such that the tribunal can say 'we think it more probable than not.'
Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Failure to Prove Transfer of Property
An applicant seeking to attach property before judgment must furnish evidence of properties registered in the defendant's name and proof that the defendant is transferring them to third parties; mere averments without supporting evidence such as records from the Ministry of Lands are insufficient to discharge the burden of proof.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (4)

  • Chandrika Prashad Singh v Hira Lal AIR (1924) 312
  • Bank of Uganda v Joseph Nsereko and 2 Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2002)
  • Yakobo Senkungu and 4 Others v Cerensio Mukasa (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2014)
  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Eligius Co (U) Ltd v Candiru Monica Aka Monika and Another (Miscellaneous Application 83 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 840 (27 July 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.