Wakilii

Okwera Charles v Kibirige Kasule Ronald and Others (Miscellaneous Application 235 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 58 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Interlocutory application for leave to proceed ex parte arising from Civil Suit No. 191 of 2022
Decision
Application allowed; main suit to proceed ex parte against 1st to 4th respondents and for formal proof against 5th respondent

Observed later treatment

Treatment recorded in citing cases followed in 1 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.

Good law Followed in 1 case and applied in 0 cases, with no adverse treatment recorded. 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.

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 High Court granted leave to the applicant to proceed ex parte against the 1st to 4th respondents who failed to file defences despite service by substituted service. The court held that substituted service is effective service and that where defendants fail to file defences within the prescribed time, the plaintiff may proceed ex parte under Order 9 Rules 10 and 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The main suit was set down for formal proof against the 5th respondent only.

Outcome

Application allowed; main suit to proceed ex parte against 1st to 4th respondents and for formal proof against 5th respondent

Facts

The applicant filed Civil Suit No. 191 of 2022 on 2 September 2022. The 1st to 4th respondents were served with court process, including by substituted service through the Daily Monitor newspaper on 14 October 2025 pursuant to a court order of 7 March 2023. Despite service, the 1st to 4th respondents failed to file defences within the prescribed time. The 5th respondent filed a written statement of defence on 8 December 2022. The suit had stalled for approximately 4 years and 3 months. The applicant sought leave to proceed ex parte against the non-responding defendants and to set down the suit for formal proof.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to proceed ex parte against the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents who failed to file defences.
  2. Whether Civil Suit No. 191 of 2022 should be set down for formal proof.

Orders

  • Leave is hereby granted to the applicant to proceed ex parte against the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents in Civil Suit No. 191 of 2022.
  • Civil suit No. 191 of 2022 be set down for formal proof against the 5th Respondent only.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Substituted Service — Effectiveness
Substituted service ordered by court is effective service under Order 5 Rule 18(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Default of Defence — Ex Parte Proceedings — Conditions
Where a defendant fails to file a defence within the time prescribed by the rules, the plaintiff may set down the suit for hearing ex parte under Order 9 Rules 10 and 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Default of Defence — Effect — Locus Standi
The effect of failure to file a defence is that the defendant locks himself out of the proceedings in the suit and has no locus standi in the matter.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (3)

Cases citing this judgment (2)

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

↓ Download PDF

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

Okwera Charles v Kibirige Kasule Ronald and Others (Miscellaneous Application 235 of 2025) [2026] UGHC 58 (29 January 2026)
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.