Wakilii

KCB Bank Uganda Limited v Raid Technologies Ltd and Others (Civil Suit No. 449 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 201 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of outstanding loan and enforcement of personal guarantees
Decision
Default judgment entered against 1st and 2nd defendants; matter to proceed against 3rd defendant who filed defence within time

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 entered default judgment against the 1st and 2nd defendants for failure to file their defence within the prescribed 15-day period under Order 9 rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The 2nd defendant filed 7 days late without seeking extension of time. The 3rd defendant filed within time and the plaintiff's right to proceed against her was preserved. The court awarded the full liquidated demand of UGX 67,900,695 plus interest at 29% per annum from judgment and costs.

Outcome

Default judgment entered against 1st and 2nd defendants; matter to proceed against 3rd defendant who filed defence within time

Facts

In March 2021, the 1st defendant obtained a loan facility of UGX 50,000,000 from the plaintiff bank at an interest rate of 29% per annum. The 2nd and 3rd defendants executed personal guarantees for the loan. The 1st defendant defaulted on its obligations and failed to regularise its accounts. The plaintiff recalled the loan and demanded payment of all monies due. The plaintiff invoked the personal guarantees but the guarantors failed to settle the outstanding sums. Summons to file defence were issued on 1 May 2025. The 2nd defendant was served on 12 May 2025 and the 3rd defendant on 20 May 2025. The defendants filed a joint defence on 1 June 2025. The 2nd defendant filed 7 days late without seeking extension of time, while the 3rd defendant filed within the prescribed 15-day period.

Issues

  1. Whether default judgment should be entered against the defendants who failed to file their defence within the prescribed time.

Orders

  • Default judgment entered against the 1st and 2nd defendants.
  • Payment of UGX 67,900,695 being outstanding principal loan and interest.
  • Interest at 29% per annum from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Plaintiff's right to proceed with the action against the 3rd defendant preserved.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Failure to File Defence Within Prescribed Time
Where a defendant fails to file a defence within the time prescribed in the summons and does not seek extension of time to file or to validate a late defence, the court may enter default judgment against that defendant under Order 9 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Liquidated Demand Against Several Defendants
Under Order 9 rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, where a plaint claims a liquidated demand and there are several defendants of whom one or more files a defence within time while others fail to do so, the court may pass judgment against those who have not filed a defence without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to proceed against those who have filed a defence.
Banking & Finance — Loan Recovery — Enforcement of Personal Guarantees
Where a borrower defaults on a loan facility and personal guarantors fail to settle outstanding sums upon invocation of their guarantees, the bank may obtain judgment against both the borrower and the guarantors for the full amount of the liquidated demand including principal, interest and costs.

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

KCB Bank Uganda Limited v Raid Technologies Ltd and Others (Civil Suit No. 449 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 201 (25 June 2025)
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.