Wakilii

Kampala Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd v Safeway Pharmacy Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 743 of 2005)

High Court · [2007] UGCOMMC 65 · 2007 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of debt following defendant's failure to file defence
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff for the full liquidated amount claimed plus interest and costs

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 court held that Order 9 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules applies only to plaints with claims for pecuniary damages only or detention of goods. Where a plaint combines a liquidated demand with claims for pecuniary damages, Rule 8 cannot apply. The court set aside the interlocutory judgment entered in error and instead entered judgment under Order 9 Rule 6 for the liquidated demand of Shs.26,927,000 with interest.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff for the full liquidated amount claimed plus interest and costs

Facts

The plaintiff supplied drugs and medicines to the defendant between 5th September 2000 and 22nd January 2001. The defendant made partial payment, leaving a balance of Shs.26,927,000 as at 27th March 2001. Despite several demands, the defendant failed to pay. The defendant was served with summons but failed to file a defence. The plaintiff applied for interlocutory judgment and the Registrar entered judgment on 14th February 2007, setting the matter down for formal proof. The plaintiff called one witness at the hearing for formal proof.

Issues

  1. Whether interlocutory judgment under Order 9 Rule 8 can be entered where a plaint combines claims for liquidated demand with claims for pecuniary damages.
  2. What is the proper procedural mechanism for entering judgment where the defendant fails to file a defence in a case combining liquidated and unliquidated claims.

Orders

  • Interlocutory judgment entered on 14th February 2007 set aside.
  • Hearing for formal proof set aside.
  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff under Order 9 Rule 6 for Shs.26,927,000.
  • Interest awarded at 8% per annum from 24th April 2005 to date of judgment.
  • Interest thereafter at court rate until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Order 9 Rule 8 — Application to Claims for Pecuniary Damages Only
Order 9 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules applies only to plaints drawn with a claim for pecuniary damages only or for detention of goods, and cannot apply where a plaint combines such claims with other claims including liquidated demands.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Liquidated Demand Distinguished from Special Damages
A claim for an unpaid debt is a liquidated demand, not a claim for special damages, even where pleaded as such, and the substance of the claim determines the applicable procedural rule.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Order 9 Rule 6 — Liquidated Demands
Where a defendant fails to file a defence to a claim for a liquidated demand, the court has discretion under Order 9 Rule 6 to enter judgment for the plaintiff without requiring formal proof.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Setting Aside Irregular Judgment
Where interlocutory judgment and formal proof proceedings are based on incorrect application of Order 9 Rule 8 to a plaint containing liquidated claims, the court may set aside such judgment and proceedings and enter correct judgment under the appropriate rule.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Dembe Trading Enterprises Ltd v Uganda Confidential Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS-0612-2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kampala Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd v Safeway Pharmacy Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 743 of 2005) [2007] UGCommC 65 (27 June 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.