Wakilii

Seruyange v Sserwanga (Civil Suit No. 605 of 2020)

High Court · [2022] UGCOMMC 87 · 2022 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of loan agreement following defendant's failure to file defence
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendant for breach of loan agreement with monetary award and costs

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

Held that where a defendant fails to file a defence despite proper service, a presumption of constructive admission arises and the plaintiff's claim must be accepted as true. The plaintiff proved on a balance of probabilities that the defendant breached a loan agreement and owed USD 25,650. Judgment entered for the plaintiff with general damages, interest at 6% per annum from date of filing suit, and costs.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendant for breach of loan agreement with monetary award and costs

Facts

In 2015, the Defendant, a cousin of the Plaintiff, requested a personal loan of USD 22,000 to revive his collapsed business, agreeing to repay within one year. The Defendant failed to repay and requested extensions. On 29 October 2019, after family mediation, the parties executed a loan agreement requiring repayment of USD 27,000 (original loan plus USD 5,000 consideration for extension) in seven instalments from December 2019 to September 2020. The agreement provided that upon default of any instalment, the entire sum would become due. The Defendant defaulted on the first instalment due 20 December 2019. After service of a demand notice in July 2020, the Defendant deposited UGX 5,000,000 (equivalent to USD 1,350), leaving an outstanding balance of USD 25,650. The Defendant failed to file a defence despite proper service.

Issues

  1. Whether the Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of USD 25,650?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • A declaration that the Defendant breached the loan agreement dated 29th October 2019.
  • An Order for payment of the sum of USD 25,650 (United States Dollars Twenty Five Thousand, Six Hundred Fifty only).
  • Interest on the decretal sum at Court rate of 6% per annum from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • General damages of UGX 20,000,000 only.
  • Costs of the suit to be paid by the Defendant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Effect of Failure to File Defence
Failure to file a defence despite proper service raises a presumption of constructive admission of the claim made in the plaint, and the plaintiff's story must be accepted as the truth.
Evidence — Burden of Proof — Civil Cases
Whoever alleges given facts and desires the court to give judgment on any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of any fact has the burden to prove that fact on a balance of probabilities, unless it is provided by law that the proof of that fact shall lie on another person.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment Principles
When assessing the quantum of general damages, courts must consider the value of the subject matter, the economic inconvenience that the plaintiff may have been put through, and the nature and extent of the injury suffered. The award of general damages is at the discretion of the court.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Discretion of Court
Costs follow the event unless for justified reasons the court otherwise orders. A successful party can only be denied costs if it is proved that, but for his or her conduct, the action would not have been brought. Costs will follow the event where the party succeeds in the main purpose of the suit.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (5)

  • United Building Services Limited v Yalesi Muziro t/A Quick Set Builders and Co. (HCCS No. 154 of 2005)
  • Storms v Hutchinson [1905] AC 515
  • Crown Beverages Ltd v Sendu Edward (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2005)
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
  • Uganda Development Bank v Mugongo Construction Co. Ltd (1981) HCB 35

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Seruyange v Sserwanga (Civil Suit No. 605 of 2020) [2022] UGCommC 87 (5 October 2022)
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.