Wakilii

Hamda Jaber Rashied Alhameli v Alshafi Investiments group LLC and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 519 of 2022)

High Court · [2022] UGHCCD 249 · 2022 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to add a party to Company Cause No. 020 of 2022
Decision
Application to add party dismissed

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 add a party to company proceedings. The applicant claimed to be a shareholder through a purchase of shares made in violation of a subsisting court order for attachment before judgment. The court held that the applicant had no locus to be joined as a necessary party because his interest was adverse to the successful litigant, his status as a shareholder was disputed and tainted by illegality, and his presence was not necessary for the court to determine whether to allow a one-member company meeting.

Outcome

Application to add party dismissed

Facts

The 1st respondent filed Company Cause No. 020 of 2022 seeking leave to hold a one-member meeting of a company. The 2nd respondent, as a decree holder against Ahmed Darwish Dagher Al Marar in HCCS No. 695 of 2017, obtained a court order to purchase 99 shares held by Al Marar. The applicant claimed to hold 99 shares in Emirates Africa Link Real Estates Limited, which he allegedly purchased from Al Marar in 2013. However, in 2013 the 1st respondent had obtained an order for attachment before judgment of those shares in Civil Suit No. 292 of 2013. The purported transfer to the applicant occurred in 2014 in violation of the attachment order. The Registrar of Companies subsequently cancelled the applicant's registration. The applicant sought to be added as a party to the company cause, claiming an interest as a shareholder.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be added as a necessary party to the Company Cause?

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Necessary Parties — Test for Addition
For a person to be joined as a necessary party under Order 1 rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, it must be shown either that the orders sought would legally affect the interests of that person and it is desirable to have that person joined to avoid multiplicity of suits, or that the defendant could not effectually set up a desired defence unless that person was joined or an order made that would bind that other person.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Necessary Parties Distinguished from Proper and Desirable Parties
Necessary parties are those who not only have an interest in the matter, but also in whose presence the proceedings could not be fairly and effectively dealt with. Proper parties are those who, though not actually interested in the claim, are joined for some good reason. Desirable parties are those who have an interest in a suit or may be affected by the result thereof.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Adverse Interest as Bar to Joinder
Where an applicant's interest in the matter is totally adverse to an existing party, and the applicant's status is disputed and tainted by illegality, the applicant has no locus to be joined as a necessary party and his presence is not necessary for the court to determine the relief sought in the proceedings.
Company Law — Shares — Transfer in Violation of Court Order — Effect on Shareholder Status
A purported sale and transfer of shares made in violation of a subsisting court order for attachment before judgment is void ab initio and confers no valid title to the transferee. The transferee is not a member of the company de facto or de jure until a court has made a pronouncement about their rights in the company over the shares.

Legislation cited (5)

  • Civil Procedure Act s.98
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.10
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.13
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3

Cases cited (3)

  • Departed Asians Property Custodian Board v Jaffer Brothers Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
  • Chief of Army Staff v Lawal (2012) 10 NWLR p 62
  • N.U.R.T.W v R.T.E.A.N (2012) 10 NWLR (pt 1307) p. 170

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hamda Jaber Rashied Alhameli v Alshafi Investiments group LLC and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 519 of 2022) [2022] UGHCCD 249 (30 November 2022)
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.