Kobi v Barasi Investments Limited (Miscellaneous Application 2986 of 2023)

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.

Holding

The court set aside the default judgment and decree, finding that service of summons was not effective. The purported service on a lawyer who did not acknowledge receipt and whom the applicant claimed was not instructed to receive process did not produce the desired result of making the defendant aware of the suit. Non-acknowledgment by the purported lawyer was a clear indication that service was ineffective, requiring the respondent to use alternative modes such as substituted service.

Outcome

Default judgment set aside; applicant granted leave to file defence within 14 days

Facts

The respondent filed a summary suit claiming the applicant failed to repay a loan of UGX 134,000,000 at 3% monthly interest. The applicant did not file an application for leave to appear and defend within 10 days as required. The court entered default judgment on 14 June 2023. The applicant sought to set aside the judgment, asserting he was never served with summons. The affidavit of service stated the applicant was called by telephone and instructed service on his lawyer, Sserwadda of Sserwadda, Muhereza & Co. Advocates, who retained a copy but refused to acknowledge receipt. The applicant denied instructing any lawyer to receive documents on his behalf.

Issues

1. Whether the default judgment and decree entered against the Applicant in civil suit No. 818 of 2022 should be set aside.
2. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to appear and defend the suit.
3. Whether service of summons was effective.

Orders

• Default judgment set aside.
• Applicant allowed to answer to the summons.
• Applicant to file written statement of defence within 14 days after delivery of this Ruling.
• Costs shall abide the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Judicature Act s.33
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 36 rule 11
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1, 2 & 3
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 5 rule 10
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 3 rule 4
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 36 rule 3(2)

Cases cited (2)

• Sharon Asasira v Housing Finance Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 660 of 2019)
• Geoffrey Gatete v William Kyobe (SCCA No. 7 of 2005)

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