Wakilii

Musoke Masembe v Victory Christian Centre (Miscellaneous Application 468 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 207 · 2024 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to file written statement of defence out of time arising from Civil Suit No. 309 of 2023
Decision
Application granted on condition that Applicant deposits UGX 3,000,000 as security for costs and pays costs of the application; main suit set for hearing

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

Court held that the Applicant was properly served with summons through the third defendant who was a joint administrator. The Applicant's deliberate failure to file a defence did not constitute sufficient cause for extension of time. However, to avoid penalizing co-administrators for the Applicant's omissions, the court granted the application conditionally, requiring the Applicant to deposit UGX 3,000,000 as security for costs and pay costs of the application.

Outcome

Application granted on condition that Applicant deposits UGX 3,000,000 as security for costs and pays costs of the application; main suit set for hearing

Facts

The Respondent filed Civil Suit No. 309 of 2023 seeking declarations that the Applicant is a trespasser and that part of the Applicant's development encroaches on the Respondent's land at Kibuga Block 7 Plot 967 Ndeeba. Summons to file defence were served on the third defendant on 10 August 2023, who was a joint administrator with the Applicant. Substituted service was later effected through New Vision newspaper dated 23 October 2023. The Applicant did not file a defence within the prescribed time. The Applicant claimed he learned of the proceedings on 14 February 2024 through one of the Respondent's witnesses, Ibrahim Magemeso. The Respondent had closed its case exparte by the time this application was filed.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to file a written statement of defence out of time.

Orders

  • The Applicant is granted leave to file a written statement of defence out of time subject to conditions.
  • The Applicant to deposit UGX 3,000,000 in court as security for costs.
  • The Applicant shall pay the costs of this application.
  • Civil Suit No. 309 of 2023 is fixed for hearing on 9 December 2024 at 10:00 am.
  • Hearing notices to issue.
  • In case the Applicant is unable to proceed, court will proceed with the exparte proceedings.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Leave to File Defence Out of Time — Requirement of Sufficient Cause
An applicant seeking extension of time to file a written statement of defence must show sufficient cause for the failure to do so within the prescribed period. Sufficient cause must relate to the inability or failure to take the necessary step within the prescribed time, not to taking a wrong decision.
Civil Procedure — Service of Summons — Service on Joint Administrators — Effect of Service on One Administrator
Where summons are served on one joint administrator acting on behalf of an estate, such service is effective service upon the estate and binds all joint administrators, even where other administrators claim they were not personally served.
Civil Procedure — Service of Summons — Service on Multiple Defendants — Order 5 Rule 9
Under Order 5 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules, where there are more defendants than one, service of summons shall be made on each defendant separately.
Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Discretion of Court — Conditions for Grant
The court has discretion under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules to extend time for filing pleadings. The court may grant such extension subject to conditions, including payment of security for costs, to balance the interests of justice and prevent prejudice to the other party.

Legislation cited (11)

  • Civil Procedure Act s.96
  • Civil Procedure Act s.98
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.1(1)(a)
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.8
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.9
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.10
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.18
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.8 r.1(2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.51 r.6
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3

Cases cited (4)

  • Hadondi Daniel v Yolam Egondi (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 67 of 2003)
  • Florence Nabatanzi v Naome Binsobedde (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 6 of 1987)
  • Hikima Karamanwpa v Saiiabi Chris (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2006)
  • Geoffrey Gatete and Another v William Kuobe [2007] UGSC 7

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Musoke_Masembe_v_Victory_Christian_Centre_(Miscellaneous_Application_468_of_2024)_[2024]_UGHCLD_207_(22_August_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.