Ssozi Vs Post Bank Uganda Limited (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2010) [2015] UGCA 53 (1 July 2015)
Court
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Case number
Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2010
The Court of Appeal held that the claim brought by the respondent included allegations of fraud, which cannot be resolved under summary procedure as provided by Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Such claims require a full trial with proper pleadings and evidence, not mere affidavit evidence. The trial judge erred in entertaining the claim under summary procedure and entering judgment in favour of the respondent. The plaint was incompetent and should have been struck out. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the High Court's ruling and orders were set aside, and the plaint was struck out.
B.D.S.Ltd v Imad F. Shteiwi (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 505 of 2008) [2008] UGCommC 51 (20 October 2008)
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number
High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 505 of 2008
The High Court of Uganda granted conditional leave to defend, requiring B.D.S Limited to deposit USD 55,000 in court within 14 days or face revival of the decree.
El-Shekeley v Abdulla (C.C. 13/1935 (Mombasa).) [1935] EACA 150 (1 January 1935)
Court
East African Court of Appeal
Case number
C.C. 13/1935 (Mombasa).
Judge
Horne J
The court held that although the plaintiff may set down a suit for hearing ex parte immediately upon the defendant's default in entering appearance, the defendant may enter appearance at any time before judgment is obtained. If the defendant actually appears in court in person or by advocate on the day fixed for ex parte hearing, the plaintiff has no right to proceed ex parte. The local rules (Order 9 r. 17) do not permit ex parte proceedings when both parties are present. The court has discretion to extend time for entering appearance and filing a defence, especially where the defendant's ap…