Wakilii

Tetra Technical Services (U) Limited v PSI Engineering (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGCOMMC 44 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appear and defend a summary suit filed under Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Decision
Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the main suit; matter to proceed to full trial

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 High Court granted unconditional leave to appear and defend where the applicant disputed the amount of debt claimed, arguing that variations to the original contracts were never agreed upon and that only UGX 61,505,539.30 remained unpaid rather than the UGX 317,119,766 claimed. The court held that the disputed existence of contract variations, the conflicting evidence on amounts paid and owing, and the need to prove whether additional works were executed constituted triable issues that could not be determined on affidavit evidence alone in summary proceedings.

Outcome

Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the main suit; matter to proceed to full trial

Facts

The Applicant and Respondent entered into service contracts on 4 August 2022 for two electricity reliability improvement projects at agreed sums of UGX 732,053,574.30 and UGX 675,455,354. The Respondent claimed it completed the projects by 31 December 2022 and that the parties agreed to variations adding UGX 133,049,140.38 and UGX 133,732,005.38 respectively on 26 October 2022 and 7 November 2022. The Respondent issued a plaint claiming UGX 517,119,766 was outstanding. The Applicant paid UGX 200,000,000 on 21 December 2023, reducing the claimed amount to UGX 317,119,766. The Applicant contended it had substantially paid the original contractual sums leaving only UGX 61,505,539.30 unpaid, and denied ever agreeing to any contract variations. The Respondent produced UMEME service orders and change request forms as evidence of variations, which the Applicant disputed as not constituting proof of agreed variations.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant raised sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No.1683 of 2023?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The Applicant is hereby granted unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No.1683 of 2023.
  • The Applicant is ordered to file its Written Statement of Defence within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Ruling.
  • Costs of the application shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Defend — Test for Granting Leave
For leave to appear and defend a summary suit to be granted, an applicant must show by affidavit or otherwise that there is a bona fide triable issue of fact or law. The applicant is not bound to show a good defence on the merits but should satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried, and the court should not enter upon the trial of the issues disclosed at the application stage.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Triable Issues — Disputed Contract Variations and Quantum
Where an applicant disputes the existence of alleged contract variations and the quantum of debt claimed, raising questions about whether variations were agreed, whether additional works were executed under the alleged variations, and whether payments made leave a substantially different balance owing than claimed, these constitute triable issues that require resolution through a full trial and cannot be determined on affidavit evidence in summary proceedings.
Civil Procedure — Evidence in Interlocutory Applications — Annexures to Affidavits
Rules that apply to affidavit evidence do not necessarily apply to annexures to those affidavits. An affidavit contains the facts to which the deponent swears to be true because he or she has personal knowledge of them, which cannot be true of annexures to affidavits. Where annexures require further explanation of their contents and their relevance is disputed, determination of their admissibility in an application for leave to defend is irrelevant as the dispute raises triable issues for full trial.
Civil Procedure — Summary Procedure — When Appropriate
Summary procedure is resorted to in clear and straightforward cases where the demand is liquidated and there are no issues for determination by the court except for the grant of the claim. Where the facts and evidence disclose triable issues that need to be proved, the matter falls outside the ambit of Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules and leave to defend must be granted.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (7)

  • Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • James Ham Ssali and Another v Commissioner for Land Registration (HCMA No. 859 of 2012)
  • Jamil Ssenyonjo v Jonathan Bunjo (H.C. Civil Suit No. 180 of 2012)
  • Kotecha v Adam Mohammed [2002] 1 EA 112
  • Kakooza John Baptist v Electoral Commission and Yiga Anthony (Supreme Court Election Petition Appeal No. 11 of 2007)
  • Twentsche Overseas Trading Co. Ltd v Bombay Garage [1958] EA 741
  • Churanjila & Co. v A.H Adam (1950) 17 EACA 92

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tetra Technical Services (U) Limited v PSI Engineering (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2024) [2024] UGCommC 44 (14 March 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.