Wakilii

Kavuma T/A Kavuma & Associates v Attorney General & Goodman Agencies (Misc Application No. 417 of 2012)

High Court · [2013] UGHCCD 44 · 2013 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for garnishee order nisi and absolute restraining judgment debtor from receiving government monies pending satisfaction of applicant's decree
Decision
Application granted with costs; 1st respondent ordered to satisfy applicant's decree before making payment to 2nd respondent

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 granted the garnishee application, holding that under section 21(1) of the Government Proceedings Act, money payable by government may be attached where the recipient is liable to pay another person. The court ruled that absent a stay of execution, the pending appeal does not bar enforcement of the applicant's decree. The 2nd respondent must not receive payment from the 1st respondent until the applicant's decree in HCCS No. 273 of 2008 is satisfied.

Outcome

Application granted with costs; 1st respondent ordered to satisfy applicant's decree before making payment to 2nd respondent

Facts

The applicant, a professional valuer, provided valuation services to the 2nd respondent (Goodman Agencies Ltd) in connection with HCCS No. 719 of 1997, a suit against the Attorney General concerning vehicles hired, seized and converted by the UPDF. The applicant obtained judgment against the 2nd respondent in HCCS No. 273 of 2008 for payment of UGX 709,277,392 as professional fees, representing 5% of the proceeds from HCCS No. 719 of 1997. The Constitutional Court ordered that the 2nd respondent was at liberty to execute the consent judgment in HCCS No. 719 of 1997 with 24% interest. The 2nd respondent obtained a writ of mandamus compelling the Treasury Officer to pay. The applicant sought an order restraining the 2nd respondent from receiving payment from the Attorney General until the applicant's decree was satisfied. The respondents argued the application was premature as appeals were pending in the Supreme Court and payment was not yet due under the valuation agreement.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should issue an order restraining the 2nd respondent from receiving monies from the 1st respondent until the applicant's decree is satisfied.
  2. Whether garnishee proceedings can attach government debts pending appeal.
  3. Whether the application is premature given pending appeals in the Supreme Court.
  4. Whether the valuation fees claimed by the applicant are due for payment before the 2nd respondent receives payment from the 1st respondent.

Orders

  • The applicant's decree in HCCS No. 273 of 2008 is to be met by the 1st respondent before payment is made to the 2nd respondent in HCCS No. 719 of 1997.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Execution — Garnishee Proceedings — Effect of Pending Appeal
An appeal does not in itself operate as a stay of execution of judgment; in the absence of an order staying execution, garnishee proceedings may be pursued notwithstanding a pending appeal.
Execution — Garnishee Proceedings Against Government — Government Proceedings Act s.21(1)
Where money is payable by government to a person liable under a court order to pay money to another person, the High Court may restrain the first person from receiving that money and order payment to the other person under section 21(1) of the Government Proceedings Act, provided no statutory prohibition on attachment applies.
Execution — Garnishee Proceedings — Prematurity — Debt Not Yet Payable
Where a judgment debtor has obtained a writ of mandamus compelling government payment and no stay of execution is in place, a garnishee application by a decree holder entitled to a percentage of those funds is not premature, notwithstanding that government payment has not yet been made.
Court Administration — Jurisdiction — Effect of Registrar's Circulars
An administrative circular by the Registrar concerning division of court business does not prevent a court from hearing a matter over which it has jurisdiction.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (5)

  • Kampala City Council v National Pharmacy (1979) HCB 215
  • Goodman Agencies Ltd v Attorney General & Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 34 of 2011)
  • Uganda Commercial v Joseph Ziritwawula (1985) HCB 96
  • Sander Dass v Municipal Council of Nairobi (1948) 15 EACA 33
  • Soroti Municipal Council V Uganda Land Commission (supra)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kavuma T_A Kavuma & Associates v Attorney General & Goodman Agencies (Misc Application No. 417 of 2012) [2013] UGHCCD 44 (26 March 2013)
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.