Wakilii

Sserufusa v Matovu & 2 Ors (Civil Suit No. 028 of 2012)

High Court · [2015] UGHCCD 90 · 2015 Plaint Rejected — Preliminary Objection Upheld AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit — preliminary objections heard at commencement of trial
Decision
Plaint rejected — suit struck out at preliminary objection stage

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 a plaintiff cannot maintain an action for professional misconduct against advocates who were never retained by him and with whom no professional or fiduciary relationship existed. Held further that where the matters complained of were directly in issue in a prior review application which the plaintiff lost, the suit is barred by res judicata. Plaint rejected under Order 7 rule 11(a) and (d) for disclosing no cause of action and being barred by law.

Outcome

Plaint rejected — suit struck out at preliminary objection stage

Facts

The plaintiff sued three defendants claiming professional misconduct, slander, verbal threats and intimidation. The first defendant was an advocate who had deposed an affidavit in a previous suit on behalf of third parties. The second defendant, also an advocate, allegedly assaulted the plaintiff using verbal threats in court premises. The third defendant was a law firm alleged to be vicariously liable. The defendants raised preliminary objections that the plaint disclosed no cause of action and that the suit was barred by law. The defendants had never been retained by the plaintiff and no professional or fiduciary relationship existed between them. The matters complained of had been in issue in Civil Review No. 6 of 2011, which the plaintiff lost.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action.
  2. Whether the suit is barred in law and an abuse of court process.

Orders

  • Suit discloses no cause of action.
  • Suit barred by law.
  • Plaint rejected under Order 7 rule 11(a) and (d) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • Costs awarded to the defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Professional Negligence — Existence of Professional Relationship
An action for professional misconduct against an advocate cannot be sustained where no professional or fiduciary relationship exists between the plaintiff and the advocate, and the advocate has never been retained or instructed by the plaintiff.
Cause of Action — Essential Elements
For a cause of action to exist, the plaintiff must have enjoyed a right, that right must have been violated, and the defendant must be liable for the violation. Where the plaintiff enjoyed no right against the defendants, no cause of action arises.
Res Judicata — Abuse of Process
Where the matters complained of in a suit were directly and substantially in issue in a prior judicial proceeding which has been determined, the subsequent suit is barred by res judicata under section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and constitutes an abuse of court process.
Rejection of Plaint — Order 7 Rule 11
A plaint may be rejected under Order 7 rule 11(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules where it discloses no cause of action, and under Order 7 rule 11(d) where the suit is barred by law.

Legislation cited (5)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Sserufusa Vs Matovu & 2 Ors (Civil Suit No. 028 of 2012) [2015] UGHCCD 90 (27 May 2015)
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.