Wakilii

John Murray (Publishers) Ltd & 10 Ors v G.W. Senkindu & Anor (High Court Civil Suit No. 1018 of 1997)

High Court · [1998] UGHC 6 · 1998 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Chamber summons application for security for costs under Order 23 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Decision
Plaintiffs ordered to furnish security for costs of UGX 15,000,000

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 where foreign plaintiffs outside the jurisdiction have no property in Uganda and have not demonstrated property in their home jurisdiction sufficient to satisfy potential costs, the court may order security for costs. The existence of reciprocal enforcement machinery does not automatically negate the need for security, particularly where execution would involve substantial time, expense, and difficulty. Applicant ordered to furnish security for costs in the sum of UGX 15,000,000.

Outcome

Plaintiffs ordered to furnish security for costs of UGX 15,000,000

Facts

The plaintiffs, comprising John Murray (Publishers) Ltd (a foreign limited liability company) and 10 others, instituted a suit against the defendants alleging that the first defendant was found selling counterfeit books that infringed the plaintiffs' genuine books. The first defendant admitted selling the books but claimed ignorance that they were counterfeits and stated he purchased them from the second defendant. The counterfeit books were seized by Police on instructions of the plaintiffs' counsel. The first defendant applied for an order requiring the plaintiffs to furnish security for costs in the sum of UGX 25,000,000, arguing that the plaintiffs had no property in Uganda, resided outside the jurisdiction, and that execution of any costs order would be difficult and costly. The plaintiffs responded that they were a large international company selling books in Uganda through an agent (Aristoc Booklex) and that reciprocal enforcement machinery existed between Uganda and the United Kingdom.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiffs, being foreign entities outside the jurisdiction with no property in Uganda, should be ordered to furnish security for costs.
  2. Whether the existence of reciprocal enforcement machinery between Uganda and the United Kingdom negates the need for security for costs.
  3. Whether the plaintiffs' status as internationally renowned entities selling books through an agent in Uganda is sufficient to obviate the need for security for costs.

Orders

  • The respondents/plaintiffs are ordered to deposit or furnish security for costs in the sum of UGX 15,000,000 (Fifteen Million Shillings only).

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Foreign Plaintiffs Outside Jurisdiction
The first consideration in applications for security for costs is whether the plaintiff has goods or chattels within the jurisdiction sufficient to answer the possible claim and available for execution.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments
The existence of reciprocal enforcement machinery between jurisdictions does not automatically preclude an order for security for costs where the plaintiff resides abroad and has no property in Uganda, particularly where execution would involve substantial time, expense, and difficulty, and where the plaintiff has not demonstrated property in the foreign jurisdiction sufficient to satisfy potential costs.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Agent in Jurisdiction
The mere fact that a foreign plaintiff sells goods to an entity in the jurisdiction does not, by itself, establish an agency relationship sufficient to demonstrate property available for execution, as title passes upon sale.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Discretionary Power
The court retains discretion in determining the quantum of security for costs, which may be less than the amount sought by the applicant, based on all circumstances of the case.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Apollinaris Company's Trade Marks [1891] 1 Ch 1
  • Valabbdas Hirji Kapadia v Thakersey Laxmidas [1960] EA 852

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

John Murray (Publishers) Ltd & 10 Ors v G.W. Senkindu & Anor (High Court Civil Suit No. 1018 of 1997) [1998] UGHC 6 (26 October 1998)
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.