Wakilii

Kalita Transporters Limited v Rubis Energy (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1199 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 144 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for unconditional leave to appear and defend a summary suit arising from Civil Suit No. 0473 of 2025
Decision
Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the summary suit and ordered to file defence within 15 days

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 Commercial Division granted the applicant unconditional leave to appear and defend a summary suit for recovery of UGX 186,114,682 for fuel and lubricants allegedly supplied. The court held that the applicant demonstrated a bona fide triable issue regarding the amount claimed, as the respondent's claim was unsupported by contractual agreements despite attaching a customer statement. The applicant satisfied the requirements under Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules by showing a dispute requiring determination.

Outcome

Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the summary suit and ordered to file defence within 15 days

Facts

The respondent sued the applicant in Civil Suit No. 473/2025 for recovery of UGX 186,114,682 allegedly owed for fuel and lubricants supplied to the applicant. The respondent filed a summary suit claiming the applicant defaulted on payment obligations despite demands. The parties had a business relationship in 2018. The respondent attached a customer statement (Annexture A) to the plaint but did not provide contractual agreements. The applicant filed this application seeking unconditional leave to appear and defend, contending that the amount claimed was unsupported and required substantiation. The respondent did not appear at the hearing and did not file written submissions despite being granted leave to do so.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has disclosed a triable issue of fact or law thereby entitling them to a grant of unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 0473 of 2025?

Orders

  • The applicant is hereby granted unconditional leave to appear and defend High Court Civil Suit No. 473/2025.
  • The applicant shall file their defence within 15 days from the date of this ruling.
  • Costs of the application shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Appear and Defend — Requirements
Before leave to appear and defend a summary suit is granted, the defendant must demonstrate by affidavit or otherwise that there is a bona fide triable issue of fact or law, and need not show a good defence on the merits but must satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Unconditional Leave — Grounds for Grant
Unconditional leave to appear and defend a summary suit will be granted where the applicant shows a good defence on the merits, or that a difficult point of law is involved, or that there is a dispute which ought to be tried, or a real dispute as to the amount claimed which requires taking an account to determine, or any other circumstances showing reasonable grounds of a bona fide defence.
Civil Procedure — Written Submissions — Failure to File — Consequences
Written submissions are a legal requirement after an order has been given and constitute an alternative to oral submissions; failure to file submissions as scheduled by the court is equivalent to refusing to speak or failure to make oral submissions before a judicial officer when the matter is coming for hearing, as written submissions are a way of prosecuting one's case.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (3)

  • Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • Susan Theophili Mbilinyi & Mrs. Susan Mbiliyi v Ivanune Jeru Mbilinyi (Miscellaneous Civil Revision No. 03 of 2023)
  • Makula Interglobal Trade Agency v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalita Transporters Limited v Rubis Energy (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1199 of 2025) [2026] UGCommC 144 (23 March 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.