Wakilii

Waiswa Cornerious and Another v Obiero Benson and Another [2026] UGHC 560

High Court · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for attachment before judgment arising from pending civil suit for damages from motor vehicle accident
Decision
Motor vehicle attached and parked at Mabira Police Station pending determination of main suit

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 defendant intends to remove property from the court's jurisdiction to obstruct execution of a potential decree, and the defendant has failed to appear or offer security despite proper service, an order for attachment before judgment is justified. The court granted attachment of a Kenyan-registered motor vehicle involved in an accident, to be parked at a police station pending determination of the main suit for damages.

Outcome

Motor vehicle attached and parked at Mabira Police Station pending determination of main suit

Facts

On 20 February 2026, the applicants' motor vehicle (UBC 432C Fuso Fighter) was involved in a road traffic accident at Sanga-Mabira Forest in Buikwe District with a motor vehicle (KCB 630Z/ZE7496 Mercedes Benz) allegedly driven negligently by the 1st respondent. The applicants filed Civil Suit No. 011 of 2026 seeking special damages of UGX 54,500,000 and general damages. The applicants brought this application for attachment before judgment, alleging that the 1st respondent was on the run to avoid criminal charges and that the 2nd respondent intended to remove the Kenyan-registered vehicle from Uganda and out of the court's jurisdiction. The respondents were duly served but failed to appear or file any reply.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses sufficient grounds for an order of attachment before judgment.
  2. What are the available remedies?

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Warrant of attachment before judgment issued for Motor Vehicle Registration No. KCB 630Z/ZE7496 Mercedes Benz, white in colour.
  • The motor vehicle shall be attached and parked at Mabira Police Station pending final determination of Civil Suit No. 0011 of 2026.
  • Respondents, their agents, servants, or any person acting on their behalf restrained from taking, moving, or disposing of the motor vehicle from Mabira Police Station until final disposal of the main suit.
  • Applicants directed to fix the main suit for immediate hearing to its logical conclusion.
  • Costs of the application to be in the outcome of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Grounds for Grant — Intent to Remove Property from Jurisdiction
An order for attachment before judgment may be granted where the court is satisfied by affidavit evidence that the defendant intends to remove property from the local limits of the court's jurisdiction with intent to obstruct or delay execution of any decree that may be passed, particularly where the property is a foreign-registered vehicle that can be easily removed across international borders.
Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Effect of Respondent's Failure to Appear — Uncontroverted Evidence
Where respondents are properly served with an application for attachment before judgment but fail to appear or file any affidavit in reply, the applicants' evidence stands uncontroverted and the court is entitled to take the same as true.
Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Purpose — Balance Between Parties
The purpose of attachment before judgment is to preserve a fair balance between the parties and give them due protection while awaiting the final outcome of the proceedings in the main suit, not to give a plaintiff security merely because suit has been instituted.
Civil Procedure — Attachment Before Judgment — Choice of Remedy — Attachment versus Security
Where a defendant has demonstrated blatant disregard for court process by failing to appear despite proper service, and the nature of the suit property (a foreign-registered motor vehicle) makes it highly unlikely that an order for security would be obeyed, attachment before judgment is the only effective remedy to preserve the suit property and secure the ends of justice.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (6)

  • Makubuya Enock Willy T/A Polla Plast v Songdoh Films (U) Ltd and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 321 of 2018)
  • Ssentongo Ismail v Masaba Godfrey (Miscellaneous Application No. 1421 of 2024)
  • Zenagalia v Sari Consulting Ltd and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 091 of 2020)
  • Welt Machines Engineering Ltd v China Road and Bridge Corporation and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 51 of 2015)
  • [1988] KLR 126
  • Imelda Nassanga v Stanbic Bank and Another (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Waiswa Cornerious and Another v Obiero Benson and Another 2026 UGHC 560 (21 May 2026)
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.