Uganda Corporation Creameries Ltd v Reamator Ltd (Civil Application 48 of 1998)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

The court held that section 47(2) of the Judicature Statute No. 13 of 1996 permits any order or judgment of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal to be executed and enforced as if it were an order or judgment of the High Court. There is nothing in the section limiting the Registrar's power to issue a warrant in execution, and the absence of execution rules in the Court of Appeal Rules does not affect the power conferred by section 47(2). Section 29 of the Civil Procedure Act need not be imported. The Registrar therefore had power to issue the warrant of attachment, which was properly issued and was not an abuse of court process. The application was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Application to set aside the warrant of attachment dismissed with costs

Facts

On 29 July 1997 the High Court entered judgment against the applicants for payment of US$365,000. The applicants filed a Notice of Appeal and applied for the record of proceedings, but the Notice and subsequent appeal were struck out by the Court of Appeal because counsel did not retain proof of service of the letter requesting proceedings under rule 82(3) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Following the striking out, the respondent filed bills of costs which were taxed and allowed at UGX 17,567,600. To realise payment, counsel for the respondent applied to the Court of Appeal for a warrant of execution, which the Registrar granted, issuing a warrant of attachment of movable property on 28 October 1998. Two motor vehicles were attached: a Mercedes Benz belonging to the first applicant and a Toyota Select Saloon allegedly belonging to a friend, Telemwa Michael, rather than the applicants. The applicants brought the application to set aside the warrant, contending the Registrar lacked power to issue it.

Issues

1. Whether section 47(2) of the Judicature Statute No. 13 of 1996 empowers the Registrar of the Court of Appeal to issue a warrant in execution of a decree of the Court of Appeal.
2. Whether the warrant of attachment issued by the Registrar on 28 October 1998 existed to be set aside and whether its issuance was an abuse of court process.
3. Whether the principle of approbation and reprobation applies to the facts of the case.

Orders

• The application is dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Judicature Statute No. 13 of 1996 s.47(2)
• Civil Procedure Act (Cap 65) s.29
• Court of Appeal Rules Directions 1996 r.1(3)
• Court of Appeal Rules Directions 1996 r.42
• Court of Appeal Rules Directions 1996 r.82(3)
• Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.55

Cases citing this judgment (4)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Uganda Corporation Creameries Limited and Another v Reamation Limited (Civil Reference No. 11 of 1999)
• Uganda Corporation Creameries Limited and Another v Reamator Limited (Miscellaneous Application 48 of 1998)
• Uganda Corporation Creameries Ltd and Another v Reamator Limited (Misc. Civil Application No. 48 of 1998)
• Uganda Corporation Creameries Ltd v Kawalya (civil Appeal reference 11 of 1999)

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