+256-770-955-129
·
info@judicialimpact.com
Mon - Fri 08:00-17:00
·

Joy Seku Lule (Plaintiff) vs Nanzala Pulisikira Oonyu & Ditongo Daniel (Defendants)

Ruling

On 20th August 2026 this court ruled that the plaintiff's suit had abated for failure to take out summons for directions. The defendants had filed a counterclaim, on whose status the court did not then pronounce. The counter-claimants, represented by Mr. Seku Jotham Bolle, now seek summons for directions on it. The counter-defendant appeared and was represented by M/S JSC Centers, Mbale. The issue is whether the counterclaim survived the abatement of the main suit.
Land SuitNO. 03 OF 2026
DateOctober 2026
MagistrateH/W KYEMBE KARIM

Let us help you!

If you need any helps, please feel free to contact us.

Call : +256-770-955-129

info@judicialimpact.com Mon – Fri 08:00-17:00

 

Resolution

A counterclaim is, in effect, a separate suit by the defendant against the plaintiff. Order 8 rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules allows a counterclaim to be proceeded with even where the plaintiff’s suit is stayed, discontinued or dismissed. Abatement under Order 11A rule 1(6) is the consequence of the plaintiff’s default in taking out summons for directions. It ends the plaintiff’s suit. The rule says nothing of a counterclaim, and Order 11A rule 1(8) itself contemplates an action proceeding only on a counterclaim, treating the counter-claimant as the plaintiff.

READ MORE ON THE RULING: Ruling_Counterclaim_LS_03_of_2026