Mukasa John Ssozi I v Semanda Alex Patrick and Another [2026] UGCOMMC 240
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 held that a valid loan transaction existed between the plaintiff and the second defendant company. Applying the Indoor Management Rule from Royal British Bank v Turquand, a third party dealing in good faith with a company director may assume internal procedures were followed. The court enforced the memorandum of understanding which superseded the original loan agreement, freezing further interest accrual at UGX 54,000,000 upon execution. The second defendant was ordered to pay UGX 114,000,000 (principal plus agreed interest), general damages of UGX 30,000,000, and interest at court rate from judgment.
Outcome
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff against the 2nd defendant for UGX 114,000,000 plus general damages and interest
Facts
In September 2020, the first defendant as director of the second defendant company borrowed UGX 60,000,000 from the plaintiff at 15% interest per month for two months, depositing two land titles as security. In August 2021, the parties executed a memorandum of understanding acknowledging the debt of UGX 60,000,000 and accrued interest of UGX 54,000,000 totalling UGX 114,000,000, agreeing that no further interest would accrue on the principal. In 2022, the second defendant issued five cheques totalling UGX 100,000,000 which bounced due to insufficient funds. The defendants failed to pay despite amicable settlement attempts. The plaintiff sued for UGX 276,000,000 claiming continued interest accrual. The defendants denied liability, claimed full payment, and contested the validity of the transactions. The defendants did not attend trial despite service.
Issues
- Whether there was a valid loan transaction between the plaintiff and the defendants.
- Whether the defendants are still indebted to the plaintiff to the tune of UGX 276,000,000.
- Whether upon default of honouring the memorandum of understanding of 14th August 2021 the percentage interest continued accruing.
- Whether an interest rate of 15% was harsh and unconscionable.
- Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought.
Orders
- The 2nd defendant shall pay to the plaintiff UGX 114,000,000 being principal and interest thereon as agreed.
- The plaintiff is awarded general damages of UGX 30,000,000 for the inconvenience occasioned by the 2nd defendant's actions.
- The plaintiff is awarded interest on the decretal sum at court rate per annum from the date of judgment till payment in full.
- The plaintiff is awarded costs of the suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (6)
- Royal British Bank v Turquand (1856) 6 E & B 327
- CTM Uganda Ltd v Allmuss Properties Uganda Ltd and 2 Others (M. A. No. 806 of 2015)
- Mahony v East Holyford Mining Co. (1875) LR 7 HL 869
- Stockloser v Johnson (1954) 1 All ER 630
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
- Harbutt's Plasticine Ltd v Wayne Tank & Pump Co. Ltd [1970] 1 QB 447
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.