Wakilii

Madodi Abdullah and Others v Marikom Investments Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 126 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 82 · 2026 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from refusal to grant leave to appear and defend in summary suit proceedings
Decision
Appeal dismissed as incompetent for failure to obtain leave of court

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

An appeal from an order refusing leave to appear and defend in summary suit proceedings under Order 36 rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not lie as of right. Leave of court must first be obtained under Order 44 rule 2 before instituting such an appeal. Where leave is not obtained, the appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as incompetent for failure to obtain leave of court

Facts

The Respondent, a money lending company, sued the Appellants under a summary plaint for recovery of UGX 32,000,000 arising from a loan agreement dated 31 August 2023. The 1st Appellant had borrowed UGX 20,000,000 repayable in three months at 20% monthly interest, with the 2nd and 3rd Appellants as guarantors. The Appellants applied for unconditional leave to appear and defend, arguing the transaction violated the Tier 4 Microfinance Money Lenders Act 2016 and the Contracts Act 2010. The trial magistrate refused leave and entered judgment for the Respondent. The Appellants appealed directly to the High Court without first obtaining leave to appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the appeal was competent without first obtaining leave of court to appeal from an order refusing leave to appear and defend

Orders

  • First preliminary objection upheld.
  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Leave to Appeal — Orders Refusing Leave to Appear and Defend
An order refusing leave to appear and defend in summary suit proceedings under Order 36 rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules is not among the orders from which an appeal lies as of right under Order 44 rule 1(1). A party must first obtain leave of court under Order 44 rule 2 before instituting such an appeal.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Competence of Appeal — Failure to Obtain Leave
Where leave is required to file an appeal and such leave is not obtained, the appeal filed is incompetent and cannot proceed. This is not merely a procedural matter but an essential jurisdictional requirement.
Civil Procedure — Appellate Jurisdiction — Creation by Statute
Appellate jurisdiction must be specifically created by law and cannot be inferred or implied. The right of appeal is a creature of statute.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (8)

  • Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
  • Pandya v. R. [1957] 336
  • Nakato Kyabanji Katusiime v Kenroy Investments Limited (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 177 of 2014)
  • Nakato Kyabanji Katusiime v Kenroy Investment Limited (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 177 of 2014)
  • Lukwago Erias v KCCA (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 6 of 2014)
  • Dr Sheik Ahmed Mohamed Kisuule v Greenland Bank (in liquidation) (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2010)
  • Makhangu vs Kibwana (1995-1998) 1 EA 175
  • Baku Raphael Obudra and Obiga Kania v Attorney General (Supreme Court Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Madodi Abdullah and Others v Marikom Investments Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 126 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 82 (17 February 2026)
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.