Wakilii

Tiles Gallery Limited v One to One Logistics Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 656 of 2019)

High Court · [2021] UGCOMMC 36 · 2021 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appear and defend summary suit arising from breach of contract claim for unpaid transport and logistics services
Decision
Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the main suit with direction to file written statement of defence within 15 days

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 an applicant seeking leave to defend a summary suit must demonstrate a bona fide triable issue of fact or law. Where an applicant claims a set-off that is directly connected to the plaintiff's claim and provides detailed facts supporting that set-off which remain unrebutted, the applicant has disclosed plausible grounds of defence sufficient to warrant unconditional leave to appear and defend.

Outcome

Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend the main suit with direction to file written statement of defence within 15 days

Facts

The Applicant contracted to import tiles from Brazil for a client, with delivery expected by 18 April 2017. The Respondent was engaged to transport the cargo from Mombasa to Kampala. The Applicant alleged that the Respondent delayed delivery by insisting on payment of an alleged USD 26,000 demurrage claim which the Applicant disputed. As a result, the cargo was not delivered by the expected date, causing the client to cancel the contract. The Applicant was forced to provide more expensive Spanish tiles to the client and eventually sold the Brazilian tiles at a discounted price over many months. The Applicant claims business losses of USD 43,105. The Respondent brought a summary suit claiming USD 49,196 for unpaid transport and logistics services. The Applicant sought leave to defend, admitting only USD 4,761 was due and claiming a right to set-off against its losses.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses any triable issues as to justify grant of leave to defend the main suit.

Orders

  • The Applicant is granted leave to appear and defend the main suit vide Civil Suit No. 598 of 2019.
  • The Written Statement of Defence shall be filed within 15 days from the date of delivery of this Ruling.
  • The costs of the Application shall abide the outcome of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Summary Suit — Leave to Appear and Defend — Test for Grant of Leave
Under Order 36 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules, unconditional leave to appear and defend a suit will be granted where the applicant shows that he or she has a good defence on the merits, or that a difficult point of law is involved, or that there is a dispute which ought to be tried, or a real dispute as to the amount claimed which requires taking an account to determine, or any other circumstances showing reasonable grounds of a bona fide defence. The applicant must demonstrate that there are issues or questions of fact or law in dispute which ought to be tried.
Summary Suit — Leave to Defend — Sufficiency of Disclosure
In an application for leave to appear and defend a summary suit, the applicant must sufficiently disclose the nature and grounds of the defence and the facts upon which it is founded. The defence so disclosed must be both bona fide and good in law. Where the court is satisfied that this threshold has been crossed, the court is bound to grant unconditional leave. Where the court is in doubt whether the proposed defence is being made in good faith, the court may grant conditional leave.
Summary Suit — Set-Off and Counterclaim as Defence
A defendant may in answer to the plaintiff's claim rely upon a set-off or counterclaim. A set-off is a defence to an action. Where an applicant seeking leave to defend sets out detailed facts disclosing a claim for set-off against the plaintiff's claim, and those facts remain unrebutted by the plaintiff, the applicant has disclosed a legitimate claim that requires investigation through a trial and warrants the grant of unconditional leave to defend.
Evidence — Affidavit Practice — Unrebutted Facts Deemed Admitted
Facts contained in an affidavit which are not denied by the opposite party are deemed to be true.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (5)

  • MMK Engineering v Mantrust Uganda Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 128 of 2012)
  • Bhaker Kotecha v Adam Muhammed [2002] 1 EA 112
  • Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • Children of Africa v Sarick Construction Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 134 of 2016)
  • Deco Tiles Uganda Ltd v DHL Global Forwarding Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 671 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tiles Gallery Limited v One to One Logistics Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 656 of 2019) [2021] UGCommC 36 (16 August 2021)
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.