Uganda Case Law

Export Trading Company (U) Limited v OBN Produce and Supply Company Limited

Export Trading Company (U) Limited v OBN Produce and Supply Company Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1871 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 168 (12 March 2025)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 1871 of 2024

Judge

Ocaya, J

The court struck out the respondent’s defence for lateness and general denials, entered default judgment, and ordered the suit to proceed to formal proof.

• Striking Out Defense
• Default Judgment
• Service Of Process
• Pleading Requirements
• General And Evasive Denials
• Striking-out-defence

Export Trading Company Limited v OBN Produce & Supply Company Limited

Export Trading Company Limited v OBN Produce & Supply Company Limited (Miscellaneous Application 1871 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 34 (12 March 2025)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 1871 of 2024

Judge

Ocaya, J

The court struck out the respondent’s defence as late and evasive, entered default judgment for the applicant, and ordered the suit to proceed to formal proof.

• Striking Out Defense
• Default Judgment
• Service Of Process
• Pleading Requirements
• Timeliness Of Filing
• General And Evasive Denials

Imaniraguha v Uganda Revenue Authority

Imaniraguha v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Suit 274 of 2021) [2023] UGCommC 156 (12 June 2023)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 274 of 2021

Judge

Wabwire, J

The High Court struck out Uganda Revenue Authority’s defence for evasive denials and held that several issues were res judicata, entering judgment for the plaintiff subject to formal proof.

• Pleadings Evasiveness
• Res Judicata
• Striking Out Defense
• Court Orders Compliance
• Tax Related Vehicle Seizure
• Pleadings-evasiveness

M.K Creditors Ltd v Kazooba

M.K Creditors Ltd v Kazooba (Miscellaneous Application No. 1341 of 2017) [2019] UGCommC 18 (11 July 2019)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 1341 of 2017

The court held that a company, as a separate legal entity, cannot be represented in court by its managing director unless that person is a qualified advocate or a recognized agent with a duly registered power of attorney. Mr. Mabirizi, not being an advocate and lacking a power of attorney, had no locus standi to appear for the applicant company. The court found that the applicant was given ample opportunity to engage an advocate but failed to do so, resulting in unnecessary delay and abuse of court process. The authorities cited by the applicant were found to be inapplicable or misapplied. Up…

Source excerpt

• Company Representation
• Locus Standi
• Right Of Audience
• Summary Judgment
• Striking Out Defense