New Uganda Securiko Ltd v David Ouma Balikowa (Civil Suit No. 305 of 2024; Miscellaneous Application 542 of 2024)

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.

Holding

The court dismissed the applicant's application for leave to appear and defend under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-appearance at the hearing and failure to serve the respondent within 21 days as required by Order 5 Rule 1(2). The court found that non-service within the stipulated timeframe is a fundamental error depriving the court of jurisdiction. Judgment was entered for the respondent/plaintiff for UGX 105,100,000 with costs.

Outcome

Application dismissed; default judgment entered for respondent/plaintiff for UGX 105,100,000 with costs

Facts

The applicant, New Uganda Securiko Ltd, filed an application for leave to appear and defend in Civil Suit No. 305 of 2024. The Registrar endorsed the application on 8 April 2024. The application was scheduled for hearing on 5 June 2024. On the hearing date, neither the applicant nor its counsel appeared in court. The respondent, David Ouma Balikowa, appeared with counsel. The respondent had not been served with the application. The respondent's counsel submitted that the applicant had failed to serve the application within 21 days of endorsement as required by Order 5 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, and that no extension of time had been sought. The respondent sought dismissal of the application and entry of default judgment.

Issues

1. Whether the application should be dismissed for non-appearance of the applicant.
2. Whether the application was competent having regard to non-service within the prescribed timeframe.
3. Whether the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to a default judgment.

Orders

• Application dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
• Costs of the application awarded to the Respondent.
• Judgment entered for the Respondent/Plaintiff against the Applicant/Defendant.
• The Respondent/Plaintiff is entitled to a sum of UGX 105,100,000 in Civil Suit No. 305 of 2024.
• The Respondent/Plaintiff is awarded costs of the application and the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (4)

• Civil Procedure Rules Order 9 Rule 22
• Civil Procedure Act s.2
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 5 Rule 1(2)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 36 Rule 5

Cases cited (1)

• Rashida Abdul Karim Hanali Vs Sulaiman

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