Freightline Limited v Astral Alanda International Limited (Civil Suit 73 of 1989)
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
Held that the defendant raised two triable issues on points of law that could not be determined summarily. The defendant satisfied the court that there were bonafide triable issues requiring full hearing. Unconditional leave to appear and defend was granted, with costs in the cause.
Outcome
Matter proceeds to full trial on the merits
Facts
Plaintiff Freightline Limited sued defendant Astral Alanda International Limited under Order 33 CPR for recovery of UGX 5,600,000 allegedly lent pursuant to a written loan agreement dated 8 September 1989. The agreement provided that the plaintiff lent the defendant the Uganda shillings equivalent of USD 5,600 at the defendant's request, repayable within thirty days. The defendant failed to repay. The defendant applied for unconditional leave to defend, initially relying on affidavit grounds but at hearing abandoned those and argued points of law: that the loan agreement was illegal for want of a money lending licence under the Money Lender's Act s.3, and that the agreement contravened the Exchange Control Act s.1(4)(a) by conducting a foreign currency transaction without ministerial permission. Plaintiff argued the loan was a single friendly loan not requiring a licence, and that USD was used only as a unit of account with payment intended in Uganda shillings.
Issues
- Whether the defendant should be granted unconditional leave to appear and defend a summary suit under Order 33 CPR.
- Whether the loan agreement was illegal as contravening the Money Lender's Act for want of a money lending licence.
- Whether the loan agreement was illegal as contravening the Exchange Control Act by conducting a foreign currency transaction without ministerial permission.
Orders
- Application for unconditional leave to appear and defend is granted.
- Defendant to file written statement of defence within seven days.
- Case to be set down for hearing on merit.
- Costs in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Money Lender's Act s.3
- Exchange Control Act s.1(4)(a)
- Decree 18/72
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 33 rule 4
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 48
Cases cited (5)
- Naks Ltd v S Kyobe Senyange [1982] HCB 52
- Muluku Interglobal Trade Agency Ltd v Bank of Uganda [1983] HCB 63
- Souza Figuerido & Co. Ltd. Vs. Moorings Hotel Co. Ltd 1959
- Adenensi Rwamukunyu v Robert BBB Kiiza (Civil Suit No. 245 of 1982)
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Bijaaba Mixed Farm Ltd (Civil Suit No. 770 of 1990)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.