[2002] UGCommC 11

[2002] UGCommC 11

The suit is barred by limitation under section 20 of the Money Lenders Act, as the cause of action accrued in May 1999 when the defendant failed to repay the loan, and the suit was filed more than twelve months later. The argument that limitation began to run only after the sale of the security is rejected; the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] UGCommC 11
Parties
Plaintiff: Alpha International Investment Ltd; Defendant: Senyonga Steven
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Suit No. 111 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
suit dismissed as time barred
Legal Topics
Money Lending Contracts, Limitation Periods, Enforceability of Security, Validity of Legal Documents
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Money Lending Contracts Limitation Periods Enforceability of Security Validity of Legal Documents

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alpha International Investment Ltd

Plaintiff

Senyonga Steven

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit is barred by limitation under section 20 of the Money Lenders Act.
  2. 2 Whether the loan agreement is void and unenforceable due to being drawn by an unlicensed advocate.
  3. 3 Whether there exists a valid memorandum or note to satisfy section 7 of the Money Lenders Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The suit is barred by limitation under section 20 of the Money Lenders Act, as the cause of action accrued in May 1999 when the defendant failed to repay the loan, and the suit was filed more than twelve months later. The argument that limitation began to run only after the sale of the security is rejected; the relevant date is when the loan became due and was not paid. Although the loan agreement was void due to being drawn by an unlicensed advocate, the court found that the loan application letter and form signed by the defendant were sufficient to constitute a valid memorandum under section 7 of the Act. Therefore, the security deposited by the defendant remains enforceable and is not...

Court Disposition

suit dismissed as time barred

Orders

  • Suit is dismissed with costs to the defendant.
  • Security deposited by the defendant is not to be returned.