“The use of the word ‘shall’ in the Civil Procedure Rules connotes that compliance is mandatory.” High Court of Uganda Clarifies Effect of Non-Compliance under Order 11A of the Civil Procedure Rules
- Waboga David
- Nov 8
- 3 min read
FACTS
The Plaintiff, John Bosco Senkayi, filed a suit against the Defendant, Muwasi James Wilson, seeking various remedies relating to a land sale transaction involving a kibanja at Namungoona II, Lubya Parish, Rubaga Division, Kampala.
The Plaintiff—who suffers from diabetic retinopathy—alleged that he had entered into a sale agreement on 25th February 2025 with the Defendant for UGX 200,000,000, payable as follows:
UGX 190,000,000 on the date of signing; and
UGX 10,000,000 within two weeks (by 11th March 2025).
The Plaintiff contended that:
The Defendant never paid the initial UGX 190,000,000 despite indicating payment in the agreement.
The Defendant wrongfully introduced himself to the Plaintiff’s tenants as the new owner despite non-payment.
The Plaintiff signed the agreement in reliance on the Defendant’s promise of immediate payment and was coerced due to his ill health and diminished sight.
The Plaintiff therefore sought:
Declarations that the contract was repudiated and null and void;
Rescission of the sale agreement; and
General damages for breach of contract.
ISSUES
Although the case had not reached substantive hearing, the preliminary issue before the Court was whether the suit was properly before the Court, given that the Plaintiff failed to take out summons for directions within the time prescribed under Order 11A, Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules (SI 71-1).
COURT’S FINDINGS
Justice Nakiganda Ida emphasized that compliance with Order 11A, Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules is mandatory. The Rule provides that where a plaint is filed, the Plaintiff must take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of the last reply or rejoinder.
The Court quoted the relevant provisions:
“Order 11A, Rule 1(6) provides that if the Plaintiff does not take out summons for directions, the suit shall abate.”
The Judge further relied on the authority of Abdu Kiwanuka Yiga v. Abubaker Kaddu Kiberu, Misc. Application No. 386 of 2022 (arising from HCCS No. 512 of 2019), where Keitirima J. held that:
“The use of the word ‘shall’ in the Civil Procedure Rules connotes that compliance is mandatory.”
Since the Plaintiff had not taken out summons for directions within the 28-day period, the suit automatically abated by operation of law.
HOLDING
The Court held that:
“The suit hereby abated under Order 11A, Rule 1(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules due to failure by the Plaintiff to take out Summons for Directions within 28 days from the date of filing of the Written Statement of Defence.”
The Court made no order as to costs.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Procedural Compliance Is Mandatory
Under Order 11A of the Civil Procedure Rules, Plaintiffs must take out summons for directions within 28 days after the filing of a Written Statement of Defence. Failure to do so automatically abates the suit, regardless of its merits.
Strict Interpretation of “Shall”
The Court reaffirmed that the term “shall” in procedural rules imposes a mandatory duty, not discretion.
Automatic Abatement
The abatement of a suit under Order 11A, Rule 1(6) does not require a separate application or court order — it occurs by operation of law once the Plaintiff defaults.
Judicial Efficiency and Case Management
The decision underscores the judiciary’s ongoing emphasis on timely prosecution and case management under the ECCMIS regime to reduce case backlog.
Read more
.jpg)
