Ushanga Limited v Registrar of Companies and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 32 of 2025)
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 where a person denies consenting to membership in a company and does not object to removal, the court has power under Section 121 of the Companies Act to order rectification of the register of members to remove that person's name, enabling the company to complete its statutory update obligations and avoid being struck off the register.
Outcome
Application granted; 2nd Respondent ordered removed from company register; Applicant directed to convene meeting and file documents for company update within 30 days
Facts
Ushanga Limited, a company incorporated in 1983, last updated its company details in 2018. The 2nd Respondent, Samuel Ssensalo, was admitted as a shareholder by resolution filed on 4 March 2019, holding one share. The company was unable to complete subsequent updates because the 2nd Respondent refused to provide his National Identification Card, which is required by the Registrar for the update process. On 14 August 2023, the Registrar struck the company off the register for failure to file annual returns for five consecutive years. The company was later reinstated but advised to complete the update process. The 2nd Respondent denied consenting to membership, claimed he never paid for shares, derived no benefit from the company, and did not object to being removed from the register. The Applicant sought court orders to compel provision of identification or alternatively to direct the Registrar to process the update without it, and to prevent the company being struck off again.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause to be granted the orders sought?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- The 1st Respondent is directed to remove the 2nd Respondent from the register of members of the Applicant.
- The Applicant is directed to convene a meeting without the 2nd Respondent to organize and ensure the filing of the relevant documents, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Ruling, for the 1st Respondent to update the Company's register.
- Each party shall bear its own costs of this application.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (18)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 (now Cap. 282) s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 26 rules 1, 2 and 3
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 rule 28
- Companies Act Cap. 106 s.130
- Companies Act s.130(5)
- Companies Act s.130(6)
- Companies Act s.42(1)
- Companies Act s.121
- Companies Act s.121(1)(a)
- Companies Act s.121(4)
- Companies Act s.128(1)
- Companies Act s.138(1)
- Companies Act s.45(2)
- Companies Act s.258
- Companies (Powers of the Registrar) Regulations SI 71 of 2016 Regulation 3
- Companies Regulations 2023 Regulation 3
- Civil Procedure Act s.27(2)
- Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service and Virtual Proceedings) Rules 2025
Cases cited (3)
- Uganda Telecom Ltd v ZTE Corporation (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2017)
- Uganda Development Bank v Muganga Construction Co. Ltd [1981] HCB 35
- In the matter of an Application by Musisi Grivas (Company Cause No. 243 of 2023)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.