Wakilii

Mubangizi Julius v Uganda Baati Limited (HCT MISC APPL NO. 311 OF 2009)

High Court · [2009] UGHC 261 · 2009 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection to defendant's written statement of defence in civil suit
Decision
Defence struck out; defendant deemed to have accepted liability; trial to proceed ex-parte on quantum of damages

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

Where a defendant files a written statement of defence outside the 15-day period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules without obtaining leave for extension of time, the defence is incompetent and must be struck out. The plaintiff is entitled to proceed ex-parte, and the defendant's failure to file a defence within time means liability is deemed accepted. The trial restricts itself to the quantum of damages only.

Outcome

Defence struck out; defendant deemed to have accepted liability; trial to proceed ex-parte on quantum of damages

Facts

The plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 37 of 2008 against the defendant. When the suit came up for hearing on 28 May 2009, counsel for the plaintiff objected to the defendant's written statement of defence on the ground that it had been filed outside the prescribed 15-day period without leave of court for extension of time under Order 5 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Counsel for the defendant admitted the defence was filed out of time but submitted the plaintiff was not prejudiced by the omission. The court was required to determine the legal position when a defence is filed out of time.

Issues

  1. Whether a written statement of defence filed outside the prescribed 15-day period without leave of court is competent.
  2. What remedy is available to a plaintiff when a defendant fails to file a defence within the prescribed time.

Orders

  • The written statement of defence was filed out of time and is struck out as being incompetent.
  • The failure to file a defence means that liability is deemed to have been accepted by the defendant.
  • The trial court restricts itself to the quantum of damages.
  • The trial proceeds ex-parte, with the defendant and its lawyer able to attend but without participation in the proceedings.
  • The defendant's conferencing notes and the authority filed on court records are expunged.
  • Costs of this application abide the results of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Written Statement of Defence — Filing Out of Time — Competence
A written statement of defence filed outside the 15-day period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules without leave of court for extension of time is incompetent and must be struck out.
Civil Procedure — Defence — Failure to File — Effect — Deemed Admission of Liability
Where a defendant fails to file a defence within the prescribed time, liability is deemed to have been accepted and the trial restricts itself to the quantum of damages.
Civil Procedure — Ex-Parte Proceedings — Defendant's Right to Participate
Where a plaintiff proceeds ex-parte following the defendant's failure to file a defence within the prescribed time, the defendant is not allowed to participate in the proceedings, though he may be present in court.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.6
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.11(2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Eldad Ahimbisibwe v World Food Programme and Others (1998) VI KALR 32

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mubangizi Julius v Uganda Baati Limited (HCT MISC APPL NO. 311 OF 2009) [2009] UGHC 261 (16 June 2009)
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.