Okullo v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 383 of 2012) [2014] UGHCCD 10 (23 January 2014)
[2014] UGHCCD 10
Okullo v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 383 of 2012)
High Court
· [2014] UGHCCD 10
· 2014
Preliminary Objection Dismissed
AI-generated summary
↓ Download
Pin to watchlist
Add to matter
Observed later treatment
Cited — treatment unverified
cited in 3 (treatment unverified)
Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.
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.
No adverse treatment recorded
Cited 3 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits.
Citations rising — 3 citing cases on record, 3 in the most recent three data years.
Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.
Judicial journey
Appeal & case history
Follow this matter from the decision below through each appellate court.
Affirmed
The decision below was upheld.
See the court’s words
“cross appeal be dismissed.”
Varied
The decision below was changed in part.
See the court’s words
“per annum be set aside and substituted with an award of compounded interest of”
Supreme Court decision located in the Wakilii corpus. Linked from court records and operative language in the judgments.
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
Held that the plaintiff's claim was not time-barred. Where a debtor makes part payment of a debt, section 22(4) of the Limitation Act deems the right of action to have accrued afresh from the date of the last payment. The defendant's part payments in 2011 and 2012 acknowledged the debt and revived the limitation period, causing time to start running anew. The Limitation Act applies to proceedings by or against government in the same manner as between private persons. Preliminary objection dismissed.
Outcome
Preliminary objection on limitation dismissed; suit to proceed to trial on merits
Facts
The plaintiff, a retired military doctor, provided medical services to a former UPDA/M leader in 1988-1989 at the direction of the Ministry of Defence. He billed government US $93,150 with agreed interest at 24% per annum from February 1989. No payment was made for over twenty years. In November 2011 and May 2012, the defendant made part payments totaling approximately UGX 232 million. The plaintiff filed suit in December 2012 claiming the outstanding balance. The defendant raised a preliminary objection that the claim was barred by the three-year limitation period under section 3(2) of the Civil Procedure and Limitation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, as the cause of action arose in 1988-1989. The plaintiff pleaded that the part payments in 2011 and 2012 constituted acknowledgment that revived the limitation period under section 22(4) of the Limitation Act.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff's claim for unpaid medical services rendered in 1988-1989 was barred by limitation under section 3(2) of the Civil Procedure and Limitation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act.
- Whether part payments made by the defendant in 2011 and 2012 constituted acknowledgment of the debt that revived the limitation period under section 22(4) of the Limitation Act.
Orders
- Preliminary objection dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Limitation — Part Payment as Acknowledgment — Revival of Limitation Period
Where a debtor makes part payment of a debt or liquidated pecuniary claim, section 22(4) of the Limitation Act deems the right of action to have accrued on the date of acknowledgment or last payment, and not before, thereby causing the limitation period to start running afresh from that date.
Limitation — Application to Government — Parity of Treatment
Section 30 of the Limitation Act provides that the Act applies to proceedings by or against government as it applies to proceedings between private persons, and government is therefore subject to the same rules regarding acknowledgment and revival of limitation periods as private debtors.
Pleadings — Exemptions from Limitation — Duty to Plead
A plaintiff relying on an exemption from the statutory limitation period, such as part payment under section 22(4) of the Limitation Act, must plead the exemption in the plaint as required by Order 7 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules for the court to consider it.
Limitation — Effect of Acknowledgment — Disputed Amount Immaterial
Where a debt is acknowledged by part payment, it is immaterial that the total amount claimed is disputed in the acknowledgment; the effect of the acknowledgment or part payment is to stop time that has started to run and cause it to start afresh.
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (6)
- Re Application of Mustapha Ramathan (Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1996)
- Hilton v Sutton Steam Laundry [1946] 1 KB 61
- Ndaula Ronald v Hajji Nadduli Abdul (Election Petition No. 20 of 2006)
- National Pharmacy Ltd v Kampala City Council [1979] HCB 256
- JK Patel v Uganda Revenue Authority (High Court Civil Suit No. 14 of 2003)
- Greenland Bank (In Liquidation) v Dr Apuuli Kihumuro & Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 790 of 2003)
Cases citing this judgment (3)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.
Okullo v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 383 of 2012) [2014] UGHCCD 10 (23 January 2014)
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.