Wakilii

Nsenga v Alliance One Tobacco Uganda Limited (Labour Dispute Reference 88 of 2021)

Industrial Court · [2021] UGIC 101 · 2021 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for security for satisfaction of a decree under Order 40 rule 5 CPR
Decision
Application dismissed for being filed before the substantive suit

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 Industrial Court dismissed an application for security for satisfaction of a decree under Order 40 rule 5 CPR on the ground that the application was filed more than two months before the memorandum of claim from which it purported to arise. The court held that Order 40 rule 5 CPR requires a pending suit in court before an attachment before judgment can be ordered, and that the application was incurably defective for having been filed before the suit.

Outcome

Application dismissed for being filed before the substantive suit

Facts

The applicant, Nsenga Moses R, filed a chamber summons seeking an order that the respondent, Alliance One Tobacco Uganda Ltd, furnish security for satisfaction of a decree in the sum of UGX 1,474,593,944. The applicant had been awarded UGX 25,162,602 by a labour officer, and the issue of damages in the sum of UGX 1,474,593,944 was referred to the Industrial Court for determination. The applicant alleged that the respondent was planning to exit the jurisdiction of the court. The application was filed on 24 May 2021. The respondent opposed the application, arguing that there was no pending suit from which the application arose. The memorandum of claim (Labour Dispute Reference 84/2021) was filed on 7 October 2021, more than two months after the application for security was filed.

Issues

  1. Whether the court can grant an order for security for satisfaction of a decree under Order 40 rule 5 CPR when the application was filed before the substantive suit was filed.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Order 40 rule 5 CPR — Requirement of Pending Suit
An order for attachment before judgment under Order 40 rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules can only be granted where there is a suit already filed and pending in court; an application filed before the substantive suit is incurably defective.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Makubuya Enock Willy v Songdoh Films (U) Ltd and Kim Sun Young (Miscellaneous Application No. 321 of 2018)
  • Coil Limited v Transtrade Services Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 14 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nsenga_v_Alliance_One_Tobacco_Uganda_Limited_(Labour_Dispute_Reference_88_of_2021)_[2021]_UGIC_101_(12_October_2021)
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.