Vegol Limited v Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 0381 of 2024)
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.
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
Court declined to rule on an application for garnishee order nisi pending determination of a prior application by the judgment debtor to set aside the garnishee absolute and contempt orders. The court held that the pending application before the trial judge contained findings that would materially affect the current application and therefore deferred its determination.
Outcome
Application deferred pending determination of prior application to set aside garnishee absolute and contempt orders
Facts
Vegol Limited obtained a decree against Sanjay Trading Co. Limited for UGX 878,094,203.23 in Civil Suit No. 0388 of 2022. Vegol commenced garnishee proceedings against Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited vide MA No. 1565 of 2022, and a garnishee absolute was granted on 22 December 2022 ordering Stanbic to pay UGX 898,240,707. When Stanbic failed to comply, Vegol brought contempt proceedings vide MA No. 0154 of 2023, which succeeded. Justice Abinyo ordered Stanbic to pay UGX 878,094,203 plus general damages of UGX 50,000,000. Vegol then filed the current application seeking a garnishee order nisi against Stanbic's accounts with Bank of Uganda to enforce the contempt order. Before this application could be heard, Stanbic had filed MA No. 2864 of 2023 in November 2023 seeking to set aside the garnishee absolute and contempt orders. That prior application was allocated to another judge and scheduled for hearing the same day as the current application.
Issues
- Whether the application for grant of a Garnishee Order Nisi should be heard exparte.
- Whether the Respondent is rightly sued in this application, having not been part of the main suit, Civil Suit No. 0388 of 2022.
- Whether the Respondent, having been held in contempt vide MA-0154-2024 should be granted audience before Court in this Application.
- What is the effect of pending applications before court on the current application.
- Whether the Affidavit in Support to the Application deponed by Kenneth Mooka, the Applicant's Advocate is rightly before Court.
- Whether the grounds of the application permit grant of a Garnishee Order Nisi.
Orders
- Court declines to pronounce itself on the framed issues pending the determination of M.A No. 2864 of 2023, which is already before the trial judge.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (4)
- Uganda Telecom in Administration v Bernard Muteise (Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2020)
- Musisi & Another vs Namugenyi
- Comform Uganda Ltd v Mega Industries Uganda Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1804 of 2014)
- Housing Finance Bank v Edward Musisi (Civil Appeal No. 188 of 2010)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
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.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.