Kiingi & 2 ors v Thabit & Brothers Hides & Skins (CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6 OF 1992) [1992] UGHCCD 3 (12 May 1992);


Search Summary: 

In this case, the appellants brought this suit to vacate an injunction order that had been granted to the respondent, restraining the appellant from dealing in any way with the suit property.


The grounds of the appeal were, that the trail magistrate erred when he failed to address the application before the court, and that the trail magistrate erred in relying on extraneous matters not before court and unknown to the appellants, thus occasioning a miscarriage of justice.


The appeal proceeded ex parte, one of the respondent had been served in person but none of them appeared before court.

Counsel for the appellants submitted that the injunction had been issued through suppression of material facts and that it should be dissolved.


Headnote and Holding: 

As regards ground one, the court found that there was no immediate threat of lose or disposal of the suit premises. No evidence had been adduced to show that there existed any special circumstance that could justify issuance of an injunction.


As regards the second ground, court found that the trail magistrate had relied on information received from court broker, that the appellants had removed some skins and hides from the store.

It was on the basis of that information that the trail magistrate gave orders that the skins and hides be sold and the proceeds deposited in court.


The court therefore found the order to be ultra vires and it was therefore set aside.


The appeal was accordingly allowed.


Subscribe to RSS - Injunction