Wakilii

The Capital Times Limited v Kakyomya (Miscellaneous Application 2141 of 2023)

High Court · [2023] UGCOMMC 142 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for unconditional leave to appear and defend arising from summary suit proceedings
Decision
Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend; two related suits consolidated

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 held that the applicant raised triable issues of fact concerning the amount of rent outstanding and whether payments had been made, warranting leave to appear and defend. Inconsistencies in the respondent's claimed amounts (UGX 72,000,000 for six months in one suit versus UGX 54,000,000 for eight months in another) created factual disputes requiring trial. The court also ordered consolidation of two related suits (Civil Suit No. 16 of 2023 and Civil Suit No. 807 of 2023) to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and contradictory findings.

Outcome

Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend; two related suits consolidated

Facts

The respondent landlord instituted two separate suits against the applicant tenant for rental arrears under a tenancy agreement dated 26 June 2019 with monthly rent of USD $1,800. In Civil Suit No. 16 of 2023, the respondent claimed UGX 72,000,000 for six months. The applicant disputed this, filed an application for leave to appear and defend, and was granted leave with an order for mediation. Before mediation concluded, the respondent instituted Civil Suit No. 807 of 2023 claiming UGX 54,000,000 for eight months. The applicant alleged it had been illegally evicted and that its cashier had paid six months' rent in cash to the respondent's lawyer. The applicant filed the present application seeking leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 807 of 2023, disputing both the amount claimed and the alleged indebtedness, and asserting a counterclaim of UGX 347,767,000.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant raised sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of leave to appear and defend the suit?
  2. What remedies are available?

Orders

  • The Applicant is granted unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 0807 of 2023.
  • The Applicant is ordered to file its Written Statement of Defence within fourteen (14) days from the date of this order.
  • Civil Suit No. 16 of 2023 and Civil Suit No. 807 of 2023 are hereby consolidated.
  • Costs of this application shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Appear and Defend — Test for Granting Leave
An applicant seeking leave to appear and defend a summary suit need not show a good defence on the merits but must satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried, and the court shall not enter upon the trial of issues disclosed at this interlocutory stage.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Triable Issues — Factual Disputes Requiring Evidence
Where there is a dispute on material facts, specifically on the amount outstanding and whether payments were made, which cannot be reconciled without considering testimony from relevant witnesses, a triable issue of fact exists warranting the grant of leave to appear and defend.
Civil Procedure — Consolidation of Suits — Same or Similar Questions of Law or Fact
Where two or more suits are pending in the same court involving the same or similar questions of law or fact, the court may order consolidation of those suits in the interest of justice, to avoid multiplicity of suits and the possibility of contradictory findings.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (6)

  • Sengonjo v Bunjo (High Court Civil Suit No. 180 of 2012)
  • Kotechi v Mohammed [2002] 7 EA 772
  • Gatete and Another v Kyobe (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005)
  • Uganda Development Bank v Kashye, Byamukama & Co. Advocates (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 35 of 1994)
  • Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency Ltd v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • Stumberg and Another v Potgieter (1970) EA 323

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

The Capital Times Limited v Kakyomya (Miscellaneous Application 2141 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 142 (24 October 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.