Wakilii

Societe BISIMAKI v Damco logistics (U) Ltd (Misc. Application No. 341 2013)

High Court · [2013] UGHCCD 97 · 2013 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ex parte application for certification of urgency to have Misc. Application No. 325 of 2013 heard during court vacation
Decision
Application for certification of urgency granted; matter certified for hearing during court vacation

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 court certified Misc. Application No. 325 of 2013 as a matter of urgency to be heard during court vacation, finding that the threatened execution of a consent judgment against perishable goods belonging to the applicant, who was not party to the underlying suit, constituted sufficient urgency under rule 4 of the Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules.

Outcome

Application for certification of urgency granted; matter certified for hearing during court vacation

Facts

The applicant, Societe Bisimaki Bakanova, brought an ex parte application seeking certification of urgency for Misc. Application No. 325 of 2013 to be heard during court vacation. The applicant claimed that the respondents were attempting to execute a consent judgment entered in Civil Suit No. 347 of 2013 by selling goods belonging to the applicant, yet the applicant was not a party to that suit. The goods in question comprised ethyl alcohol in 240 by 250 litre plastic drums (portable alcohol 94.6%), which counsel described as volatile and perishable. Misc. Application No. 325 of 2013 sought orders staying execution of the consent judgment. The applicant argued that if the matter was not heard during vacation, the consent judgment would be executed, the goods would be auctioned, and the applicant would suffer substantial financial loss.

Issues

  1. Whether Miscellaneous Application No. 325 of 2013 is of an urgent nature to be heard during court vacation.

Orders

  • Application to amend the Notice of Motion granted.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 325 of 2013 certified as a matter of urgency.
  • Matter set for hearing on 19th July 2013.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Court Vacation — Certification of Urgency — Requirements
For an application to be heard during court vacation under rule 4 of the Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules, the applicant must demonstrate that the matter is urgent and the hearing must be preceded by a certificate of urgency.
Civil Procedure — Court Vacation — Urgency — Threatened Execution Against Non-Party
A matter is sufficiently urgent to be heard during court vacation where the respondent intends to execute a consent judgment by selling perishable goods belonging to the applicant who was not party to the underlying suit, and the applicant has challenged the judgment.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (2)

  • Noor Muhammed v Jaffery Wanami (Civil Revision No. 002 of 2007)
  • Stewards of Gospel Talents Ltd v Nelson Onyango and 7 Others (HCCA No. 14 of 2008)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Societe BISIMAKI v Damco logistics (U) Ltd (Misc. Application No. 341_2013) [2013] UGHCCD 97 (18 July 2013)
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.