[2002] UGHC 30

[2002] UGHC 30

The court held that the respondent's status as a foreign company with no known assets in Uganda, coupled with the absence of disclosure regarding its country of registration or business, constitutes special circumstances warranting an order for security for costs. The court found that, at this interlocutory stage,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] UGHC 30
Parties
Applicant: The Jubilee Insurance Company of Uganda Ltd; Respondent: Krediet Geneve Inc
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
MISC.Application No. 338 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Outcome
application_granted
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Foreign Company Assets, Misrepresentation, Discretionary Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Security for Costs Foreign Company Assets Misrepresentation Discretionary Orders

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Jubilee Insurance Company of Uganda Ltd

Applicant

Krediet Geneve Inc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order for security for costs against a foreign company with no known assets in Uganda.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's lack of disclosed country of registration or business affects the necessity for security for costs.
  3. 3 Whether the merits of the main suit (Civil Suit No. 333 of 2001) justify the order for security for costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent's status as a foreign company with no known assets in Uganda, coupled with the absence of disclosure regarding its country of registration or business, constitutes special circumstances warranting an order for security for costs. The court found that, at this interlocutory stage, it is inappropriate to determine which party has higher prospects of success in the main suit, especially given the nature of the claim (misrepresentation). The prima facie justification for requiring the respondent to provide security for costs remains, and the applicant is entitled to the order sought. The amount of security is within the court's discretion, and in this case,...

Court Disposition

application_granted

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to provide security for costs in Civil Suit No. 333 of 2001 in the sum of UGX 4,000,000 by bond to the satisfaction of the registrar.
  • The bond must be filed within 30 days from the date of delivery of this ruling.