Wakilii

Speke Hotel 1996 Limited T/a Speke Hotel Apartments v Nadage aka Don Zella (Miscellaneous Application 456 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHCCD 206 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for security for costs arising from civil suit for recovery of damages
Decision
Application granted with order for respondent to provide security for costs

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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

An application for security for costs requires proof that the plaintiff's suit is frivolous and vexatious and that the defendant has a good defence likely to succeed. The court found that the respondent plaintiff had no contract with the applicant defendant, as the hotel room was booked by a third party. The suit therefore disclosed no cause of action. The respondent was not domiciled in Uganda and had no known property or income there, creating a risk that costs could not be recovered. Security for costs of UGX 20,000,000 was ordered.

Outcome

Application granted with order for respondent to provide security for costs

Facts

The respondent brought a suit against the applicant hotel claiming special, general and punitive damages totalling USD 125,000 for theft of her property from hotel apartment 107 on 25 December 2020. The applicant contended the respondent conspired with Male Shanitah and the alleged burglar Adome Jeremy to stage a purported burglary using counterfeit money. The applicant claimed the suit was frivolous as the hotel room had been booked by Shanitah Male, not the respondent, meaning no contract existed between the parties. The respondent was not ordinarily domiciled in Uganda and had no known property or source of income there. The application for security for costs was unopposed.

Issues

  1. Whether there are sufficient grounds for a grant of an application for security for costs to the applicant/defendant against the respondent/plaintiff.
  2. Whether there are any remedies available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Respondent/plaintiff to furnish security for costs of UGX 20,000,000 within three months from the date of this order, or provide a bank guarantee or bond within one month.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Considerations for Grant
An application for security for costs is granted at the discretion of the court upon consideration of two main elements: whether the plaintiff's suit is frivolous and vexatious, and whether the defendant has a good defence to the suit which is likely to succeed. Only after these two elements have been considered may factors like the plaintiff's inability to pay be taken into account.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Assessment of Prima Facie Case
In determining whether to grant security for costs, the court must consider the prima facie case of both the plaintiff and the defendant based on the pleadings, affidavits filed in support of or in opposition to the application, and any other material available at that stage, without conducting a detailed examination on the merits unless the issues are clear.
Contract Law — Privity of Contract — Locus Standi
Where a plaintiff brings suit claiming negligence arising from a contractual relationship, but the contract was entered into between the defendant and a third party and not the plaintiff, the plaintiff has no locus standi to institute the action and the suit discloses no cause of action.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Uncontested Application
Where facts are deposed to in an affidavit in support of an application and the application is not opposed, the evidence is unassailed and the same is admitted as presented to the court.
Civil Procedure — Security for Costs — Non-Resident Plaintiff
Where a plaintiff is not ordinarily domiciled within the jurisdiction and has no known property or source of income within the jurisdiction, the court may order security for costs to protect the defendant from the risk of being unable to recover costs in the event of success, provided the other requirements for security for costs are met.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.26 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.26 r.3

Cases cited (6)

  • Namboro and Waburo v Kaala [1975] HCB 315
  • GM Combined (U) Ltd v AK Detergents (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 34 of 1995)
  • Frantonios Marine Services Pte Ltd v Kay Swee Twan [2008] 4 SLR(R)224
  • R v Ajit Singh [1957] EA 822
  • Samwiri Musa v Rose Achen [1978] HCB 297
  • Gateway Land Pte Ltd v Turner (East Asia) Pte Ltd [1987] SLR (R) 746

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.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Speke Hotel 1996 Limited T_a Speke Hotel Apartments v Nadage aka Don Zella (Miscellaneous Application 456 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 206 (7 July 2023)
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.