Kagumaho v Ninsiima (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICTAION NO. 13 OF 2020)
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
Court granted temporary injunction restraining respondent from enforcing recovery of loan pending final determination of main suit. Applicant established triable issues regarding absence of money lending license and legality of interest charged. Court found applicant risked irreparable injury from potential arrest and police action relating to dishonoured cheques while main suit was pending.
Outcome
Temporary injunction granted pending determination of main suit
Facts
The applicant obtained a loan facility from the respondent in 2016 for UGX 10,000,000. He made some cash payments totalling UGX 24,960,000 but defaulted on subsequent payments. The respondent claimed the debt had risen to UGX 78,340,200 due to 20% monthly interest. The applicant issued several post-dated cheques totalling UGX 61,340,400 which were dishonoured. The respondent reported the matter to Jinja Road Police Station. The applicant filed Civil Suit No. 531 of 2019 challenging the debt on grounds that the respondent lacked a money lending license and charged illegal interest rates contrary to the Tier 4 Micro Finance Institutions and Money Lenders Act. He then brought this application for a temporary injunction to restrain enforcement of the debt pending determination of the main suit.
Issues
- Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success.
- Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable injury if the temporary injunction is not granted.
Orders
- A temporary injunction is granted restraining the respondent, her servants or agents from any attempts to enforce or recover the loan advanced to the applicant in the sum of UGX 78,340,200 together with interest or commencing any recovery process for the same until final determination of Civil Suit No. 531 of 2019.
- Costs to stay in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Judicature Act Cap 13 s.38(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 41 r.2
- Tier 4 Micro Finance Institutions and Money Lenders Act
Cases cited (7)
- Kiyimba-Kaggwa v Hajji Katende AbduNasser (Civil Suit No. 2109 of 1984)
- American Cynamid v Ethicon [1975] 1 ALLER 504
- Imelda G. Basudde Nalongo v Tereza Mwewulizi and Another (HCMA No. 402 of 2003)
- Giella v Casman Brown & Co. Ltd (CA No. 51 of 1972)
- City Council of Kampala v Donozio Musisi Sekyaya C.A Civil Application No. 3 of 200
- Sembule Investments Ltd v Uganda Baati Ltd (MA No. 664 of 2009)
- Housing Finance and Another v Edward Musisi (Misc. App No. 158 of 2010)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.