Wakilii

Turinawe Rwangomani and 2 Others v Nkuuna and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 118 of 2023; Miscellaneous Application 42 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 89 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to strike out the respondents' written statement of defence and counterclaim for being filed out of time and without leave of court
Decision
The respondents' counterclaim was struck out for being filed without leave of court. The application to strike out the written statement of defence was resolved by consent of parties validating it.

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 counterclaim is a separate suit and cannot be introduced as part of an amended written statement of defence without leave of court, even when replying to an amended plaint. Under Order 6 rules 19 and 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules, a defendant replying to an amended plaint may only amend his or her existing pleadings, not introduce entirely new claims that were not part of the original defence. The respondents' counterclaim was struck out.

Outcome

The respondents' counterclaim was struck out for being filed without leave of court. The application to strike out the written statement of defence was resolved by consent of parties validating it.

Facts

The plaintiffs/applicants instituted a suit concerning wrongful cancellation of their certificate of title. The suit originated as HCCS No. 394 of 2013 and underwent several transfers and renumbering, eventually becoming HCCS No. 99 of 2023 (formerly LD-HCCS No. 200 of 2020). The respondents were added as defendants. After the plaintiffs filed a further amended plaint on 29/9/2020 and served it on 12/10/2020, the respondents filed their written statement of defence and a counterclaim on 3/12/2020. The applicants contended that the respondents' pleadings were filed out of time (beyond the prescribed 15 days) and that the counterclaim was improperly introduced without leave of court, as it had not been part of the original defence filed in 2014.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents' written statement of defence and counterclaim filed on 3/12/2020 should be struck off for being filed out of time.
  2. Whether a defendant may introduce a counterclaim for the first time when filing an amended written statement of defence in reply to an amended plaint, without first obtaining leave of court.

Orders

  • The defendants/respondents' counterclaim filed on 3/12/2020 is struck out with costs.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 118 of 2023 (formerly LD-M.A No. 1796 of 2021) is allowed with costs.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 42 of 2024 (formerly LD-M.A No. 1619 of 2022) is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Amendment of Pleadings — Counterclaims — Requirement for Leave of Court
A counterclaim is a separate suit and cannot be introduced for the first time as part of an amended written statement of defence in reply to an amended plaint without first obtaining leave of court.
Amendment of Pleadings — Scope of Order 6 Rules 19 and 24 CPR
Under Order 6 rules 19 and 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules, when a defendant replies to an amended plaint, he or she may only amend existing pleadings in the written statement of defence; the defendant cannot introduce a counterclaim that was never part of the original pleadings without leave of court.
Counterclaims — Distinction from Defence
A counterclaim is not a defence but a separate suit which, if pleaded, requires the court to consider it and make specific findings on it as a distinct action with distinct remedies.
Amendment of Pleadings — Amended Plaint — Cause of Action
An amended plaint is expected to sustain the same cause of action as against the defendant; the amended plaint should not introduce a new or distinct cause of action not pleaded in the original plaint.

Legislation cited (7)

  • Civil Procedure Act s.98
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 rr.1 & 2
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.24
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.2
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.8 r.7
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.19
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.8 r.1

Cases cited (6)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Turinawe Rwangomani and 2 Others v Nkuuna and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 118 of 2023; Miscellaneous Application 42 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 89 (2
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.