Wakilii

Ronald Kyeyune v Stephen Byamukama (Miscellaneous Application No. 258 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 214 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside default judgment entered in summary suit for debt recovery
Decision
Default judgment of 28 March 2025 remains in force

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

Application to set aside default judgment dismissed. The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate good cause under Order 36 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The applicant admitted service of summons, filed his application for leave to defend out of time, and proposed a sham defence that contradicted his earlier acknowledgment of indebtedness through his lawyers. Good cause requires evidence of a triable defence, which was not established.

Outcome

Default judgment of 28 March 2025 remains in force

Facts

The respondent lent the applicant UGX 70,000,000 under a partnership agreement, repayable in one month. The applicant defaulted. Through his lawyers, the applicant acknowledged the debt on 8 October 2024 and proposed a payment plan, claiming to have advanced UGX 5,000,000 to the respondent. The respondent accepted the payment plan but the applicant failed to pay. The respondent filed suit on 9 December 2024 under summary procedure. The applicant was served with summons on 21 February 2025. He filed an application for leave to appear and defend on 10 March 2025, 18 days after service. Default judgment was entered on 28 March 2025. The applicant then brought this application to set aside the default judgment, claiming he was served with a single sheet indicating 15 days to file defence and that his earlier application was pending when judgment was entered.

Issues

  1. Whether the default judgment entered on 28 March 2025 should be set aside.
  2. Whether the applicant demonstrated good cause for setting aside the default judgment.
  3. Whether the applicant has a triable defence to the underlying suit.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Setting Aside — Good Cause — Order 36 Rule 11
Under Order 36 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules, a court may set aside a default judgment if satisfied that service of summons was not effective or for any other good cause. Good cause has been consistently defined as evidence that the defendant has a triable defence to the suit.
Civil Procedure — Summary Procedure — Time Limits — Specially Endorsed Plaint
A specially endorsed plaint under summary procedure must be replied to within 10 days, not 15 days. An application for leave to appear and defend filed after the 10-day period is out of time.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Sham Defence — Floodgate Rule
Courts will not allow parties to ignore summons served on them and then come months later with a sham defence seeking leave to file it. Where a defendant has previously acknowledged indebtedness through his lawyers but later denies the agreement entirely, the proposed defence is a sham and does not constitute good cause for setting aside a default judgment.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (3)

  • Geoffrey Gatete & Another v William Kyobe (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005)
  • Post Bank (U) Ltd v Abdu Ssozi (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2015)
  • Amer Nagy v Ekame & Another (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ronald Kyeyune v Stephen Byamukama (Miscellaneous Application No. 258 of 2025) [2025] UGHCCD 214 (28 November 2025)
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.