Wakilii

Hilton High School Ltd & Ors v Matoya Maroria (HCT-00-CC-MA 634 of 2007)

High Court · [2007] UGCOMMC 92 · 2007 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to defend in summary suit for dishonoured cheque, subsequently withdrawn after payment of principal sum
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff for principal sum already paid; costs to be taxed

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

Where a defendant issued a dishonoured cheque, failed to pay after demand notice, and only paid the principal sum after suit was filed, the payment does not extinguish the plaintiff's claim for costs. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Act to award costs to the plaintiff both in the main suit and the withdrawn application, as costs follow the event and the defendants had themselves undertaken to pay costs.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff for principal sum already paid; costs to be taxed

Facts

The plaintiff sued the defendants in a summary suit for recovery of Shs.20,000,000 arising from a dishonoured cheque dated 15 June 2007. The cheque was banked on 9 July 2007 and returned unpaid two days later. The plaintiff's lawyers issued a demand notice on 13 July 2007 requiring payment of the principal sum plus damages and legal fees within seven days. The defendants acknowledged the debt through their lawyers on 6 August 2007 and proposed payment within three months. The plaintiff rejected this and proposed one month from 13 July 2007. When the defendants failed to pay, the plaintiff filed suit on 31 August 2007. The defendants applied for leave to defend on 12 September 2007. On 26 September 2007, the defendants paid the principal sum of Shs.20,000,000 directly to the plaintiff and promised to pay costs by 8 October 2007. The defendants then withdrew their application, arguing that payment had extinguished the plaintiff's claim.

Issues

  1. Whether payment of the principal sum after suit was filed wholly extinguished the plaintiff's claim including costs.
  2. Whether the defendants should be awarded costs or each party should bear its own costs following withdrawal of the application.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appear and defend withdrawn.
  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendants jointly and severally in the main suit.
  • Defendants to pay costs of the withdrawn application to the plaintiff.
  • Defendants to pay costs of the main suit to the plaintiff.
  • Plaintiff to present Bill of costs for taxation and settlement.

Rules and key headnotes

Costs — Discretion of court — Payment after suit filed
Payment of the principal sum claimed after a suit has been filed does not wholly extinguish the plaintiff's claim where the claim includes costs of the suit.
Costs — General principle — Costs follow the event
The usual result with regard to costs is that the loser pays the winner's costs, and a successful party should be awarded costs unless the judge for good reason orders otherwise, the discretion being exercised judicially under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Dishonoured cheques — Recovery — Costs
Where a defendant issues a dishonoured cheque, fails to pay after demand notice, and only pays the principal sum after suit is filed, the plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit as the defendant's conduct necessitated litigation.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Uganda Development Bank v Muganga Construction Company Ltd [1981] HCB 35

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hilton High School Ltd & Ors v Matoya Maroria (HCT-00-CC-MA 634 of 2007) [2007] UGCommC 92 (15 November 2007)
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.