Wakilii

Ssentongo v Kayamja and 4 Others (Miscellaneous Application 2255 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 256 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection to counter claim in miscellaneous application arising from civil suit
Decision
Preliminary objection to counter claim upheld; counter claim amendment application rejected

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 granted Miscellaneous Application No. 2255/2024 as unopposed where the respondents failed to reply within the time ordered and instead filed a separate application seeking to amend the counter claim. The court held this constituted an abuse of court process calculated to defeat the preliminary objection, and rejected the subsequent amendment application under section 17(2) of the Judicature Act.

Outcome

Preliminary objection to counter claim upheld; counter claim amendment application rejected

Facts

The applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 2255/2024 with a preliminary objection to the respondents' counter claim in Civil Suit No. 382/2022. On 16 September 2024, the respondents requested time to file a reply, and the court gave them until 23 October 2024. Instead of filing a reply to the preliminary objection, the respondents filed Miscellaneous Application No. 2820/2024 seeking leave to add another party and amend the counter claim. The applicant's counsel asked the court to uphold the preliminary objection, arguing it was uncontested. The respondents explained they filed the amendment application rather than replying because they found it necessary to add Henry Panel Work Ltd as a party.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents' failure to respond to Miscellaneous Application No. 2255/2024 entitled the applicant to have it granted as unopposed.
  2. Whether the respondents' filing of Miscellaneous Application No. 2820/2024 seeking to amend the counter claim instead of responding to the preliminary objection constituted an abuse of court process.

Orders

  • Miscellaneous Application No. 2255/2024 granted as prayed.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 2820/2024 (application to amend counter claim) rejected.
  • No order as to costs in Miscellaneous Application No. 2820/2024.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Failure to Respond — Grant as Unopposed
Where a party is ordered to respond to a preliminary objection by a specified date and fails to do so, the court may grant the preliminary objection as unopposed under Order 6 rule 29 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Abuse of Court Process — Filing Amendment Application to Circumvent Preliminary Objection
Filing an application to amend a counter claim instead of responding to a preliminary objection against that counter claim constitutes an abuse of court process calculated to defeat the preliminary objection, and the court will not encourage such conduct under section 17(2) of the Judicature Act.

Legislation cited (4)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ssentongo_v_Kayamja_and_4_Others_(Miscellaneous_Application_2255_of_2024)_[2024]_UGHCLD_256_(23_October_2024)
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.