Tumusiime v Magandazi & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 971 of 2015)
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 temporary injunction issues where the applicant demonstrates a prima facie case, likelihood of irreparable injury not atoned for by damages, and the balance of convenience favours the grant. The applicant established an arguable case as purchaser having paid 90% of the purchase price and taken possession. Persistent threats to impound the vehicle constitute irreparable injury not measurable in monetary terms. Temporary injunction granted restraining respondents from impounding or reselling the vehicle pending disposal of the main suit.
Outcome
Temporary injunction granted restraining respondents from impounding or reselling the vehicle pending disposal of the main suit
Facts
On 10 July 2015, the applicant purchased a Toyota Land Cruiser from the first respondent, who acted as agent/broker for the second respondent, the registered owner. The applicant paid UGX 50,000,000 initially, then UGX 7,500,000 and UGX 11,000,000 subsequently, leaving a balance of UGX 6,500,000 from a total purchase price of UGX 75,000,000. The applicant took possession of the vehicle on signing the agreement. The second respondent contacted the applicant demanding UGX 45,000,000 and threatened to impound the vehicle. On 10 October 2015, the first respondent impounded the vehicle but released it after intervention. The applicant filed suit and this application seeking a temporary injunction against further impounding. The second respondent claimed he sold the vehicle to the first respondent for UGX 70,000,000, received UGX 25,000,000, and was owed UGX 45,000,000. The first respondent admitted all the applicant's allegations and supported his claim. Both respondents failed to appear at the hearing.
Issues
- Whether a temporary injunction should issue to restrain the respondents from impounding and reselling a motor vehicle pending the hearing and disposal of the main suit.
- Whether the applicant established a prima facie case with probability of success.
- Whether the applicant would suffer irreparable injury that cannot be atoned for by an award of damages.
- Whether the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction.
Orders
- A temporary injunction issues restraining the Respondents/Defendants, their agents or those claiming under them from impounding, attaching and reselling Motor Vehicle Registration Number UAW 949 G, Toyota Land Cruiser VX HDJ 101, Silver in colour and 1998 model, engine number 1HD0 161048 and Chassis Number HDJ 1010008349, pending the hearing and disposal of HCCS 776 of 2015.
- Application succeeds with costs in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
Cases cited (3)
- Margaret, Duchess of Argyll v Duke of Argyll and Others [1965] 1 All ER 611
- Giella v Cassman Brown and Company Ltd [1973] EA 358
- Noormohamed Janmohamed v Kassamali Virji Madhani [1963] 1 EACA 8
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.