Uganda Registration Services Bureau v Stellar Properties Limited [2022] UGHC 269
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
Leave to appear and defend refused. The court held that the applicant failed to establish triable issues. The tenancy agreements were duly executed by the Accounting Officer with Attorney General clearance; litigation was the agreed dispute resolution mechanism, not arbitration; and the applicant failed to produce evidence disputing the quantum of rental arrears. Judgment entered for UGX 5,689,186,152 in rental arrears plus UGX 613,687,842 for subsequent period.
Outcome
Application dismissed; judgment entered for Respondent for total rental arrears of UGX 6,302,873,994
Facts
The Respondent landlord filed a summary suit claiming UGX 6,136,000,000 in rental arrears from the Applicant tenant under three successive tenancy agreements spanning approximately 15 years. The Applicant occupied commercial premises and paid rent partially but accumulated substantial arrears over four years. The Applicant terminated the tenancy on 29 August 2022, admitting outstanding obligations. All three tenancy agreements were signed by the Applicant's Accounting Officer (the deponent herself signing the third agreement) and cleared by the Attorney General. The Solicitor General had advised that the dispute resolution clause be changed from arbitration to litigation, which amendment was incorporated into the final agreement. The Applicant filed this application seeking leave to defend, alleging procurement irregularities, claiming arbitration was the proper dispute mechanism, and challenging the quantum without providing contrary figures.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant should be granted unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 688 of 2022.
- Whether the tenancy agreements forming the basis of the claim were illegal due to procurement irregularities.
- Whether the dispute should be referred to arbitration under the tenancy agreements.
- Whether there is a triable issue regarding the quantum of rental arrears claimed.
Orders
- Application for leave to appear and defend dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
- Judgment entered in favour of the Respondent as prayed in Civil Suit No. 688 of 2022.
- The Applicant shall pay UGX 5,689,186,152 being rental arrears owed to the Respondent for the period up to 30th September 2022.
- The Applicant shall pay UGX 613,687,842 to the Respondent for the period 1st October to 31st December 2022.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Judicature Act Cap 13 s.33
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 36
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.26
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act s.5
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Articles 44, 274(1)
Cases cited (2)
- Mako Warehouse Co. Ltd v Total (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1031 of 2021)
- MMK Engineering v Mantrust Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 128 of 2021)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.