[2007] UGCommC 78
The court held that the objection regarding immunity under Section 118(2) of the Financial Institutions Act should not be determined at the stage of considering an application for amendment and joinder of parties. The proper time to address such substantive objections is at trial, after evidence has been adduced....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] UGCommC 78
- Parties
- Applicant: Balikowa Nixon; Respondent: Post Bank Ltd
- Court
- Commercial Court of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- HCT-00-CC-MA 587 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Amendment of Plaint
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Plaint, Joinder of Parties, Bank Regulation, Immunity From Liability
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Balikowa Nixon
Applicant
Post Bank Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Amendment of Plaint
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave should be granted to amend the plaint to add Bank of Uganda as a party to the suit.
- 2 Whether the objection based on immunity under Section 118(2) of the Financial Institutions Act should be determined at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the objection regarding immunity under Section 118(2) of the Financial Institutions Act should not be determined at the stage of considering an application for amendment and joinder of parties. The proper time to address such substantive objections is at trial, after evidence has been adduced. Since the respondent did not oppose the application on any other ground, and in order to ensure that all matters in issue between the parties are fully heard and determined, the court found it just to allow the applicant to amend the plaint and add Bank of Uganda as a defendant. The application was therefore allowed, with costs in the cause, and the applicant was directed to file...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Leave is granted to the applicant to amend the plaint and add Bank of Uganda as a defendant.
- The plaintiff shall file an amended plaint within 10 days from the date of this ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
**THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA HOLDEN AT KAMPALA**
**COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION**
HCT-00-CC-MA-0587-2007
(Arising from HCT-00-CC-CS-0774-2007)
Balikowa Nixon Applicant
Versus
Post Bank Ltd Respondent
**BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE FMS EGONDA-NTENDE**
**RULING**
1. The applicant is seeking leave to amend his plaint and add Bank of Uganda as a party to this suit and that costs of this application be provided for. The main ground of this application is that the respondent in its written statement of defence claims that it is acting in accordance with an order from Bank of Uganda which is the regulator of the financial institutions. It is the contention of the applicant that the Bank of Uganda should be held accountable for its actions. 2. This application was opposed by the respondent on the ground that the current defendant enjoys immunity from liability in accordance with Section 118(2) of the Financial Institutions Act. Mr. Kiyemba Mutale for the applicant argued that this objection should form part of the issues at trial, and not be raised at this stage. 3. I have read the plaint and it appears to me that it is the contention of the plaintiff in the plaint that any freezing order that the Bank of Uganda purported to issue had been quashed by the High Court of Uganda, and thus afforded no protection to the defendant. This is a matter that will be considered at some point in the trial of this case. It may be that evidence may have to be taken before the issue can be concluded. It does not have to be necessarily considered at this stage when we are dealing with whether or not to add a party to this action. For that reason I decline to deal with the objection to this application raised by Mr. Adriko, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. As the respondent did not oppose this application upon any other ground, other than the claim for immunity from liability for the respondent, and it does appear to me, that in order to fully hear and determine all matters in issue between the parties, it is just to allow the applicant add Bank of Uganda as a defendant in this matter. 5. I accordingly allow this application with costs in the cause. The plaintiff shall file an amended plaint with 10 days from today. Signed, dated and delivered this 18th day of October 2007
FMS Egonda-Ntende Judge
* [Commercial Court](http://www.ulii.org/commercial-court) * [Add to Significant Recent Additions](http://www.ulii.org/admin/content/nodequeue/1/add/1/5212?destination=node%2F5212&token=96b37ec3a88ce47d18feefec071bae82)
**THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA HOLDEN AT KAMPALA**
**COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION**
HCT-00-CC-MA-0587-2007
(Arising from HCT-00-CC-CS-0774-2007)
Balikowa Nixon Applicant
Versus
Post Bank Ltd Respondent
**BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE FMS EGONDA-NTENDE**
**RULING**
1. The applicant is seeking leave to amend his plaint and add Bank of Uganda as a party to this suit and that costs of this application be provided for. The main ground of this application is that the respondent in its written statement of defence claims that it is acting in accordance with an order from Bank of Uganda which is the regulator of the financial institutions. It is the contention of the applicant that the Bank of Uganda should be held accountable for its actions. 2. This application was opposed by the respondent on the ground that the current defendant enjoys immunity from liability in accordance with Section 118(2) of the Financial Institutions Act. Mr. Kiyemba Mutale for the applicant argued that this objection should form part of the issues at trial, and not be raised at this stage. 3. I have read the plaint and it appears to me that it is the contention of the plaintiff in the plaint that any freezing order that the Bank of Uganda purported to issue had been quashed by the High Court of Uganda, and thus afforded no protection to the defendant. This is a matter that will be considered at some point in the trial of this case. It may be that evidence may have to be taken before the issue can be concluded. It does not have to be necessarily considered at this stage when we are dealing with whether or not to add a party to this action. For that reason I decline to deal with the objection to this application raised by Mr. Adriko, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. As the respondent did not oppose this application upon any other ground, other than the claim for immunity from liability for the respondent, and it does appear to me, that in order to fully hear and determine all matters in issue between the parties, it is just to allow the applicant add Bank of Uganda as a defendant in this matter. 5. I accordingly allow this application with costs in the cause. The plaintiff shall file an amended plaint with 10 days from today. Signed, dated and delivered this 18th day of October 2007
FMS Egonda-Ntende Judge
* [Commercial Court](http://www.ulii.org/commercial-court) * [Add to Significant Recent Additions](http://www.ulii.org/admin/content/nodequeue/1/add/1/5212?destination=node%2F5212&token=96b37ec3a88ce47d18feefec071bae82)