Muwanga v Katende (H.C.Miscellaneous Application No. 988 of 2020)
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 where parties to a civil suit reach a settlement agreement during pendency of the suit, the court may record the compromise and pass a decree in accordance with its terms under Order 25 rule 6 CPR. A compromise agreement entered into voluntarily, without coercion, and with full knowledge of its terms constitutes a full and final settlement bringing the suit to its logical conclusion.
Outcome
Decree passed in terms of compromise agreement; respondent ordered to pay balance sum and agreed costs
Facts
The applicant filed Civil Suit 823 of 2019 against the respondent claiming UGX 60,000,000/=. During pendency of the suit, the respondent paid UGX 39,000,000/=, leaving a balance of UGX 21,000,000/=. By agreement dated 5 February 2020, the parties compromised the suit with the respondent agreeing to pay the balance in two equal instalments and costs of UGX 5,000,000/= by 5 April 2020. The respondent failed to make payment. The applicant then filed this application under Order 25 rule 6 CPR seeking a decree in terms of the compromise agreement. The respondent opposed the application but filed no written submissions.
Issues
- Whether the civil suit had been compromised by the parties through a lawful settlement agreement.
- Whether the court should pass a decree in accordance with the compromise agreement for payment of the balance sum and agreed costs.
Orders
- H.C.C.S No. 823 of 2019 was compromised by the parties.
- The respondent shall pay UGX 21,000,000/= and agreed costs of UGX 5,000,000/= to the applicant as per the settlement agreement.
- Costs of this application are provided for.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (4)
- Sakaria v Nampost Limited [2020] NALCMD 5
- Metals Australia Limited v Malakia Joses Amukutuwa (SA 31/2009)
- Elizabeth Mbambus Vs Motor Vehicle Accident Fund (20131 NAHCMD 214
- Golin t/a Golin Engineering v Cloete (1998) 121 NLC
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.