[2006] UGCommC 30

[2006] UGCommC 30

The court found that the plaintiff was engaged in the business of money lending without a valid licence, as evidenced by his willingness to lend to all and sundry at an excessive interest rate of 25% per month. The transaction between the parties was not a friendly loan but a business arrangement falling squarely...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] UGCommC 30
Parties
Plaintiff: Jamba Soita Ali; Defendant: David Salaam
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-CS 400 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed
Legal Topics
Money Lending, Illegality of Contract, Burden of Proof, Special Damages
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Money Lending Illegality of Contract Burden of Proof Special Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jamba Soita Ali

Plaintiff

David Salaam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff advanced to the defendant the sum of Shs.9,000,000 as claimed in the plaint.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs claimed or at all.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was engaged in the business of money lending without a valid licence, as evidenced by his willingness to lend to all and sundry at an excessive interest rate of 25% per month. The transaction between the parties was not a friendly loan but a business arrangement falling squarely within the scope of the Money Lenders Act. Since the plaintiff was not a registered money lender, the agreement was illegal and unenforceable. The court further held that amending the plaint to abandon the claim for interest did not cure the illegality of the underlying transaction. Even if the cause of action had been valid, the plaintiff failed to prove the amount advanced or...

Court Disposition

suit dismissed

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs, save any costs already decreed to either party.