Wakilii

Samuel G.L Balagadde and Another v Kiizza Wandira (Miscellaneous Application No. 1159 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 123 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside default judgment arising from Civil Suit No. 0108 of 2019
Decision
Application to set aside default judgment dismissed; default judgment stands

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 High Court dismissed an application to set aside a default judgment where the applicants claimed non-service of summons. The court found that service had been properly effected on the first applicant, who was a director of the second applicant company, on 5 March 2019. The applicants failed to challenge evidence that the first applicant had signed and acknowledged receipt of the summons. The application, filed over five years after service, constituted inordinate delay and abuse of court process.

Outcome

Application to set aside default judgment dismissed; default judgment stands

Facts

The applicants sought to set aside a default judgment entered in Civil Suit No. 0108 of 2019, claiming they were not served with summons. The respondent opposed the application, producing an affidavit of service showing that the first applicant received and signed for the summons to file defence and plaint on 5 March 2019. The first applicant was also a director and shareholder of the second applicant company. The applicants did not file a defence, leading to default judgment. The application to set aside was filed on 18 June 2024, over five years after service was effected.

Issues

  1. Whether this application discloses sufficient grounds for the grant of reliefs sought.
  2. What remedies are available.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Setting Aside Default Judgment — Requirements under Order 9 Rule 27
Under Order 9 Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Rules, a defendant seeking to set aside an ex parte decree must satisfy the court either that the summons was not duly served or that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called for hearing.
Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Service on Company through Director
Under Order 29 Rule 2(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules, service upon a director, secretary, or any other principal officer of a company is deemed to be proper service upon the company.
Civil Procedure — Burden of Proof — Applicant Alleging Non-Service
An applicant who alleges that summons was not duly served bears the burden of proving that fact under Sections 101 and 103 of the Evidence Act, and must adduce evidence to discharge that burden.
Civil Procedure — Abuse of Process — Inordinate Delay in Filing Application
Filing an application to set aside a default judgment over five years after service was effected, without explanation for the delay, constitutes inordinate delay and abuse of court process, warranting dismissal under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (6)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Samuel G.L Balagadde and Another v Kiizza Wandira (Miscellaneous Application No. 1159 of 2024) [2026] UGCommC 123 (7 April 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.