[2005] UGCommC 10

[2005] UGCommC 10

The Court found that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply because the previous suit (HCCS No. 1/2000) was not determined on the merits but was struck out on a preliminary point. The rejection of the plaint under Order 7 rule 11(a) CPR did not preclude the Plaintiffs from presenting a fresh plaint under Order...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] UGCommC 10
Parties
Plaintiff: Robert Mwesigwa and Others; Defendant: Bank of Uganda
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-CS 588 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
Both preliminary objections are rejected. The suit shall proceed to determine whether the plaint raises a cause of action against the Defendant.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Cause of Action, Statutory Protection, Bad Faith Allegation, Employment Termination, Pending Suit Bar
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Employment and Labour Res Judicata Cause of Action Statutory Protection Bad Faith Allegation Employment Termination Pending Suit Bar

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Mwesigwa and Others

Plaintiff

Bank of Uganda

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objections

  1. 1 Whether the suit against the Defendant is res judicata, having been previously tried and disposed of by the same Court.
  2. 2 Whether the suit is barred by section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act due to the existence of another pending suit raising the same issues.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiffs have a cause of action against Bank of Uganda after amending their plaint to allege bad faith.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply because the previous suit (HCCS No. 1/2000) was not determined on the merits but was struck out on a preliminary point. The rejection of the plaint under Order 7 rule 11(a) CPR did not preclude the Plaintiffs from presenting a fresh plaint under Order 7 rule 13 CPR, especially after remedying the defects and alleging bad faith. The Court also held that section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act does not bar the present suit, as the parties in the two suits are different (ICB in the previous suit, Bank of Uganda in the present suit), and both institutions are independent. The existence of similar suits was satisfactorily explained,...

Court Disposition

Both preliminary objections are rejected. The suit shall proceed to determine whether the plaint raises a cause of action against the Defendant.

Orders

  • The Plaintiffs shall have the attendant costs herein in any event.
  • The Court shall entertain the issue of whether or not the plaint herein raises a cause of action against the Defendant or else proceed with the scheduling conference.