Wakilii

KCB Bank Uganda Limited v Range Consult Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Application 15 of 2022)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 98 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to strike out a civil suit for failure to comply with an order to add a co-defendant
Decision
Application dismissed with directions for both parties to amend pleadings to add third party as co-defendant

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 3 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 3 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 dismissed the application to strike out the suit. It held that where a defendant successfully applies to add a third party as a co-defendant, the duty to amend pleadings to effect that addition falls on the applicant, not the plaintiff who had opposed the addition on grounds of no cause of action. The plaintiff had no duty to amend its plaint to add a party against whom it had no cause of action. No contempt arose as no order directed the plaintiff to amend.

Outcome

Application dismissed with directions for both parties to amend pleadings to add third party as co-defendant

Facts

Range Consult (U) Ltd sued KCB Bank (U) Ltd in C.S No. 022 of 2022 for wrongfully and negligently paying out Ugx 21,000,000 from the plaintiff's account. The plaintiff alleged that Musinguzi Bigirwenkya Patrick, a director and co-signatory, forged the signature of the other co-signatory and obtained the money without proper authorisation. The defendant filed a defence denying wrongdoing and then filed Misc. Application No. 03 of 2022 to add Musinguzi as a co-defendant. The Registrar granted that application on 13 July 2022 with costs in the cause. Nine months later, the defendant filed the present application to strike out the plaintiff's suit for failing to amend the plaint to add Musinguzi as a co-defendant. The plaintiff opposed, arguing it had no cause of action against Musinguzi and that it was the defendant's duty to effect the amendment.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff's suit ought to be struck out for the failure of the plaintiff/Respondent to add Musinguzi Bigirwenkya as a co-defendant in the suit.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • The Plaintiff/Respondent is directed to amend the plaint to add Musinguzi Bigirwenkya as a necessary party/defendant and serve upon him the summons within 2 weeks from the date of this ruling.
  • The Defendant/Applicant, KCB Bank (U) Ltd to file an amended defence within one week and Musinguzi Bigirwenkya Patrick to file his defence within 2 weeks after service of the summons upon him.
  • In default of the plaintiff/Respondent to amend the plaint accordingly, the Defendant/Applicant to amend the WSD and include the said Musinguzi as a 3rd party or to file a Counter claim against him as a Counter defendant.
  • No order is made as to costs since it was the duty of court to give directions to the parties after allowing the application to amend pleadings.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Duty to Amend Pleadings after Order Adding Party
Where a defendant successfully applies under Order 1 rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules to add a third party as a co-defendant, the duty to amend pleadings to effect that addition falls on the applicant defendant, not on the plaintiff who opposed the addition on grounds of having no cause of action against the third party.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Failure to Comply with Order
A party cannot be held in contempt of court for failing to comply with an order that does not expressly direct that party to take specific action. Where an order to add a party is obtained by the defendant for the defendant's benefit, the absence of a specific direction to the plaintiff to amend the plaint means no duty arises on the plaintiff and no contempt is established.
Civil Procedure — Striking Out — Abuse of Process
A suit should not be struck out on grounds of abuse of process or contempt where the plaintiff has not violated any order of court and the duty to effect an amendment arising from a defendant's application falls on the applicant defendant.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases citing this judgment (3)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

KCB Bank Uganda Limited v Range Consult Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Application 15 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 98 (31 January 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.