Wakilii

Mukasa v Kidzi (Miscellaneous Application 2558 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 248 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to serve court documents out of jurisdiction, arising from Miscellaneous Cause No. 0041 of 2024
Decision
Application granted with leave to serve the respondent out of jurisdiction in the Netherlands via electronic means

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 High Court granted the applicant leave to serve court documents on the respondent out of jurisdiction in the Netherlands through electronic means such as WhatsApp or email. The court held that where personal service cannot be effected at a defendant's last known address in Uganda, service out of jurisdiction is permissible under Order 5 rule 22(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules where the defendant is domiciled or ordinarily resident within the jurisdiction and the applicant has a good cause of action. Electronic service is deemed effective provided proof of delivery is adduced.

Outcome

Application granted with leave to serve the respondent out of jurisdiction in the Netherlands via electronic means

Facts

The applicant filed Miscellaneous Cause No. 0041 of 2024 seeking a vesting order for land comprised in Kyadondo Block 101 Plot 59 at Watuba. The respondent sold the land to the applicant on 14 November 2005 while in Amsterdam, Netherlands. The applicant later relocated to Uganda and began the process of transferring the land into his name, which required the physical attendance of the respondent at the Wakiso land office. The applicant attempted to serve the respondent at his last known address in Uganda at Makerere-Kavule, Triangle Zone, but was unsuccessful. The respondent's last known address is in the Netherlands at Danauweg 4, 1043 Amsterdam, and his lawyers are located at P/A Hemonylaan 27, 1074 BJ Amsterdam.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to serve Miscellaneous Cause No. 0041 of 2024 out of jurisdiction?

Orders

  • Application granted.
  • The applicant is granted leave to serve the respondent with Miscellaneous Cause No. 0041 of 2024 out of jurisdiction through electronic means (WhatsApp or email).
  • The applicant must adduce proof that service was effected onto the respondent.
  • No orders as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Service of Process — Service Out of Jurisdiction — Requirements
An applicant seeking leave to serve court documents out of jurisdiction must show by affidavit that they have a good cause of action and specify the place or country where the defendant is or may probably be found.
Service of Process — Service Out of Jurisdiction — Grounds
Under Order 5 rule 22(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules, service out of jurisdiction may be allowed where relief is sought against a person domiciled or ordinarily resident within the jurisdiction.
Service of Process — Electronic Service — Validity and Requirements
Electronic service of court documents through modern means of communication such as WhatsApp or email is permitted where ordinary modes of service cannot be effected, provided the electronic format achieves the intended result of notifying the opposite party of court proceedings and proof of delivery is adduced.
Service of Process — Electronic Service via WhatsApp — Proof of Delivery
Where service is effected through WhatsApp, the icon indicators on the app must clearly indicate that the message and attachments were not only delivered to the respondent's mobile number but also opened, or that the electronic gadget displays double blue ticks, in order for service to be deemed effective.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (3)

  • Kabagambe and Others v Kenafric Ltd and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 157 of 1993)
  • Musumba Isaac Isanga v Quid Financials Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2020)
  • SBI Cards & Payments Services Pvt Ltd v Rohidas Jadhav (Execution Application No. 1196 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mukasa_v_Kidzi_(Miscellaneous_Application_2558_of_2024)_[2024]_UGHCLD_248_(29_October_2024)
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.