Wakilii

Equity Bank Uganda Limited v Stevo Traders Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1848 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 315 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside ex parte order arising from Civil Suit No. 0650 of 2024
Decision
Application dismissed; applicant directed to pursue post-judgment remedies if dissatisfied with main suit judgment

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 dismissed an application to set aside an ex parte order. The applicant wrongly cited Order 9 rule 23 which applies to plaintiff non-appearance, not defendant absence. The applicant failed to prosecute a pending third party application, did not serve it on the respondent, and provided no evidence of inadvertent circumstances preventing court attendance. The application was overtaken by events as judgment had been delivered in the main suit. The appropriate remedy was to pursue post-judgment remedies.

Outcome

Application dismissed; applicant directed to pursue post-judgment remedies if dissatisfied with main suit judgment

Facts

Equity Bank Uganda Limited was the defendant in Civil Suit No. 0650/2024 brought by Stevo Traders Limited. The bank filed its defence in August 2024 and a joint scheduling memorandum in September 2024. On 2 June 2025, the bank filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1207/2025 seeking leave to issue a third party notice. When the main suit came up for hearing on 25 June 2025, the bank's counsel did not appear. The court granted the plaintiff's application to proceed ex parte. The bank then filed this application on 20 August 2025 seeking to set aside the ex parte order, claiming inadvertent circumstances prevented attendance and that a pending third party application made the ex parte order a procedural irregularity. Judgment in the main suit was delivered on 25 March 2026 before this application was determined.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses sufficient grounds to set aside the order to proceed ex parte vide Civil Suit No. 0650/2024

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs of the application.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders — Wrong Provision Cited — Effect
Citing the wrong legal provision is not fatal and should not obstruct justice, provided the court can identify the correct applicable provision.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Pending Applications — Effect on Main Suit Hearing
The mere filing of an interlocutory application does not automatically stay proceedings in the main suit. An applicant must serve the application, obtain a hearing date, inform the court of its existence, and request a stay of the main suit pending determination of the application.
Civil Procedure — Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders — Sufficient Cause — Burden of Proof
General assertions of inadvertent circumstances preventing court attendance, unsupported by evidence, do not constitute sufficient cause to set aside an ex parte order.
Civil Procedure — Applications Overtaken by Events — Post-Judgment Remedies
Where judgment has been delivered in the main suit before determination of an application to set aside an ex parte order, the application is overtaken by events and the appropriate course is to pursue post-judgment remedies.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (1)

  • Tumusiime t/a Bakery Limited and Another v San Sara Agro Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 186 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Equity Bank Uganda Limited v Stevo Traders Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1848 of 2025) [2026] UGCommC 315 (18 June 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.