Registered Trustees of Kampala Archdiocese v Semyalo Michael (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2006)

Observed later treatment

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 of Appeal allowed the appeal. It held that the respondent was bound by the compromise consent judgment because his advocates were still acting for all plaintiffs when it was filed and endorsed, and any withdrawal of instructions was not brought to the appellant's attention. As next friend of the minor plaintiffs whose claims (identical to his own) he had compromised, the respondent could not approbate and reprobate the same consent judgment. The Court further found no sufficient evidence of fraudulent misrepresentation or non-disclosure by the appellant, since it was made clear that the dioceses, not individual contributors, were the shareholders. The trial court's judgment and orders were set aside and the suit dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Appeal allowed; trial court judgment set aside and respondent's suit dismissed with costs

Facts

In the 1950s the late Archbishop Kiwanuka conceived a church-based micro-finance project which led to incorporation of Centenary Rural Development Trust Limited in 1983, later licensed as Centenary Rural Development Bank. Catholic dioceses held shares as shareholders, funded by parishioners' contributions. The respondent contributed to shares purchased by the appellant diocese, including contributions in the names of his three infant daughters. The respondent and twelve others sued the bank, later joining the appellant and Masaka diocese, alleging wrongful omission from the register of members and misrepresentation that they were buying ordinary shares. Twelve plaintiffs, including the respondent's three daughters (through him as next friend), settled out of court by consent decree, agreeing to disinvest their contributions and receive costs. The respondent proceeded alone. The trial court dismissed his claim against the bank but found the appellant liable for non-disclosures, awarding general and punitive damages, dividends, a disinvestment sum, interest and costs. The appellant appealed.

Issues

1. Whether the respondent was bound by the compromise (consent judgment) reached in the suit.
2. Whether the appellant was liable to the respondent on the grounds proposed by the trial judge or at all.
3. Whether the trial judge properly evaluated the evidence.
4. Whether the awards made by the trial judge were justified.

Orders

• Appeal allowed with costs.
• Judgment and orders of the lower court set aside.
• An order substituted dismissing the respondent's suit with costs.
• The respondent is free to disinvest and be paid any accrued dividends thereon in terms of the compromise.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (4)

• Civil Procedure Rules Order VI Rule 12
• Civil Procedure Rules Order VI Rule 13
• Civil Procedure Rules Order VI Rule 17
• Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 101

Cases cited (7)

• Re Hobler (1844) 50 ER 40
• Hall v Jesse (1876) 3 ChD 177
• Taylor VS Coqwell (1965 ) SJ 49
• Re Newen (1903) 1 Ch D 817
• Buladina Nankya & Another v Bulasio Konde (1979) HCB 239
• Re Taylor's Application (1972) 2 All ER 873
• Verschures Creameries Ltd v Hull and Netherlands Steamship Company Ltd (1921) AC 608

Cases citing this judgment (1)

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.

• Semyalo v The Registered Trustees Kampala Archdiocese (Civil Appeal 12 of 2009)

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