Wakilii

Freightline Limited v Astral Alanda International Limited (CIVIL SUIT NO. 73 1989; Civil Suit No. 770 90)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 121 · 1992 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for unconditional leave to appear and defend under Order 33 rule 4 and Order 48 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Decision
Application granted; matter to proceed to full hearing on merit

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 court found reasonable grounds of defence concerning alleged contraventions of the Money Lender's Act and the Exchange Control Act. Unconditional leave to appear and defend was granted.

Outcome

Application granted; matter to proceed to full hearing on merit

Facts

By written agreement dated 8 September 1989, the plaintiff lent Uganda Shillings 3,360,000 to the defendant at the defendant's request. The defendant undertook to repay the sum within thirty days of signing the agreement. The defendant failed to pay. The plaintiff brought suit under Order 33 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The defendant applied for unconditional leave to appear and defend, abandoning affidavit grounds and arguing points of law: that the loan agreement contravened the Money Lender's Act because the plaintiff lacked a money lending licence, and that it contravened the Exchange Control Act because the loan was denominated in US dollars without ministerial permission. The plaintiff responded that the Money Lender's Act applied only to repeated business transactions, not single friendly loans without interest, and that the US dollar was used merely as a unit of account to protect against inflation.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant should be granted unconditional leave to appear and defend the suit.
  2. Whether the loan agreement contravenes the Money Lender's Act requiring a money lending licence.
  3. Whether the loan agreement contravenes the Exchange Control Act by transacting in foreign currency without ministerial permission.

Orders

  • Application for unconditional leave to appear and defend 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

Civil Procedure — Summary Judgment — Leave to Defend — Test for Granting Leave
A defendant seeking leave to defend must show by affidavit or otherwise that there is a bona fide triable issue of fact or law. Where there are reasonable grounds of defence to the claim, the plaintiff is not entitled to summary judgment. The defendant need not show a good defence on the merits but must satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried.
Civil Procedure — Summary Judgment — Triable Issue — Real Issue Distinguished from Sham Issue
The defence must raise a real issue and not a sham one in the sense that if the facts alleged by the defence are established there would be a plausible defence. Leave to defend can be refused only where even upon the facts alleged by the defendant the plaintiff must succeed, that is, where the defendant has no defence at all.
Civil Procedure — Summary Judgment — Court Not to Try Issues at Leave Stage
At the stage of determining whether to grant leave to defend, the court should not enter upon the trial of the issues disclosed. Triable issues on points of law that cannot be determined in a summary manner warrant the grant of leave to defend.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Money Lender's Act
  • Exchange Control Act s.1(4)(a) as amended by Decree 18/72
  • Order 33 rule 4 Civil Procedure Rules
  • Order 48 Civil Procedure Rules

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 Fig v. Prido & Co. Ltd. Vs. Moorings Hotel Co. Ltd 1959 EA 425
  • Atdenensi Kwamukunyu Vs. Robert B.B. Kii Civil Suit No. 245/198?
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Bjaaba Mixed Farm Ltd (Civil Suit No. 770 of 1990)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Freightline Limited v Astral Alanda International Limited (CIVIL SUIT NO. 73_1989; Civil Suit No. 770_90) [1992] UGHC 121 (21 February 1992)
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.