Wakilii

Namubiru v Katongole & Anor (Civil Suit No. 345 of 2015)

High Court · [2017] UGCOMMC 34 · 2017 Counterclaim Dismissed with Costs AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on preliminary objection to counterclaim alleging no cause of action disclosed
Decision
Counterclaim dismissed with costs following withdrawal by counterclaimant

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 counterclaimant withdrew the counterclaim after the second counter defendant raised a preliminary objection that it disclosed no cause of action. The court held that withdrawal after the suit had been fixed for hearing required leave under Order 25 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Because the defendants to the counterclaim had incurred costs, particularly the second defendant who had filed objections, the counterclaim was dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Outcome

Counterclaim dismissed with costs following withdrawal by counterclaimant

Facts

Irene Namubiru was the counterclaimant against Derrick Katongole and Catherine Kusasira as defendants to the counterclaim. The second counter defendant filed a preliminary objection under Order 6 rules 28, 29 and 30 of the Civil Procedure Rules, arguing that the counterclaim disclosed no cause of action against her. The matter was scheduled for hearing on the preliminary objection. However, before the hearing, the counterclaimant's counsel filed written submissions indicating that they wished to withdraw the counterclaim against both counter defendants and prayed for dismissal with no order as to costs. The defendants had already incurred costs in defending the counterclaim, particularly the second defendant who had filed objections by 16th March 2017.

Issues

  1. Whether the counterclaim should be dismissed with costs or without costs following withdrawal by the counterclaimant.

Orders

  • Counterclaim dismissed with costs to the defendants to the counterclaim.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Withdrawal of Suit — Costs
Where a counterclaimant seeks to withdraw a counterclaim after the matter has been fixed for hearing, leave of court is required under Order 25 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, and the court may order discontinuance on such terms as to costs as may be just.
Civil Procedure — Withdrawal of Suit — Award of Costs on Withdrawal
Where defendants to a counterclaim have incurred costs in defending the claim, including filing preliminary objections, the counterclaim should be dismissed with costs to the defendants even where the counterclaimant seeks withdrawal with no order as to costs.

Legislation cited (5)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Namubiru v Katongole & Anor (Civil Suit No. 345 of 2015) [2017] UGCommC 34 (11 April 2017)
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.