[2009] UGCommC 44

[2009] UGCommC 44

The court held that the grounds advanced by the applicant—failure of negotiations, delay in hearing, and interests of justice—do not constitute valid grounds for reviewing a consent order. The law is settled that a consent judgment is a fresh agreement between parties and can only be set aside for fraud, mistake,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UGCommC 44
Parties
Applicant: Salini Construction S. P. A; Respondent: Bisons Consult International
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-MA 88 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review Consent Order and Unfreeze Account
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment Review, Garnishee Orders, Contractual Disputes, Security for Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Consent Judgment Review Garnishee Orders Contractual Disputes Security for Judgment

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salini Construction S. P. A

Applicant

Bisons Consult International

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review Consent Order and Unfreeze Account

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established grounds to justify review of the consent order dated 3rd December 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's Barclays Bank account should be unfrozen to allow access to the attached funds pending disposal of the main suit.
  3. 3 Whether the failure of negotiations, delay in hearing, or interests of justice constitute valid grounds for review of a consent order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the grounds advanced by the applicant—failure of negotiations, delay in hearing, and interests of justice—do not constitute valid grounds for reviewing a consent order. The law is settled that a consent judgment is a fresh agreement between parties and can only be set aside for fraud, mistake, misapprehension, or illegality. The evidence showed that the consent order was entered into to protect the respondent's interests, especially since the applicant is a foreign company with no assets in Uganda and was winding up its project. The applicant failed to rebut the respondent's affidavit evidence or provide a bank guarantee as previously agreed. The global financial...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application to review paragraphs 4 and 6 of the consent order dated 3rd December 2007 is dismissed.
  • The application to unfreeze the defendant's Barclays Bank account No. 0001424232 is dismissed.