Wakilii

Frontier Logistics International (U) Ltd and Another v Absa Bank (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1755 of 2025 (Arising from Civil Suit No. 0119 of 2019))

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 62 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for discovery of valuation report arising from pending civil suit for debt recovery
Decision
Application dismissed

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 High Court dismissed an application for discovery of a valuation report related to property used as loan collateral. The Court held that where facility letters impose a contractual obligation on the borrower to provide a valuation report, and the lender asserts after searching its records that the document does not exist in its possession, discovery will be denied absent contrary evidence. The Court found that although the valuation report would be relevant and material to the applicants' defence of fraud and illegality, the applicants failed to meet all grounds for discovery because they did not discharge their burden of proving the document was in the respondent's custody or control.

Outcome

Application dismissed

Facts

The respondent bank sued the applicants in Civil Suit No. 119 of 2019 for recovery of a debt arising from a loan disbursed to the first applicant and guaranteed by the second applicant. Prior to disbursing the loan, a valuation was conducted of property at Kibuga Block 4 Plot 890 used as collateral. The applicants filed this interlocutory application seeking an order that the respondent deliver a copy of the valuation report, which they intended to use in their defence. The facility letters dated 27 July 2016 required the first applicant to avail the respondent with a valuation of the property. The respondent stated it had searched its records and could not trace the valuation report. The applicants alleged fraud and illegality in the realization of the security and argued the valuation report was needed to prove the property was sold at an undervalue.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicants have adduced sufficient grounds for orders sought?
  2. What remedies are available?

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Discovery — Orders for Discovery — Preconditions
For an order for discovery to be granted, the applicant must prove that the documents sought are (a) relevant and material to the issues in the suit, (b) not privileged or otherwise protected, and (c) within the possession, custody and control of the respondent.
Burden of Proof — Existence of Facts
Whoever alleges a given fact and desires the court to give judgment on any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of that fact has the burden to prove that fact unless it is provided by law that the proof of that fact shall lie on another person.
Discovery — Document Not in Respondent's Possession
An order for discovery should be denied when the respondent asserts that the requested documents do not exist or are not in its possession, custody, or control unless there is contrary evidence.
Loan Facilities — Contractual Obligation to Provide Valuation
Where facility letters impose a contractual obligation on a borrower to obtain and provide a valuation report in respect of collateral, the obligation to retain a copy of that report lies with the borrower, not the lender.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (9)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Frontier Logistics International (U) Ltd and Another v Absa Bank (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1755 of 2025 (Arising from Civil Suit No. 0119 of 2019)) [2026] UGCommC 62 (23 February 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.