Injunctions and interdicts

Katusiime Elias v Arncy Holdings Limited (HCT-00-CC-MA-272 of 2005) [2005] UGCOMMC 24 (23 May 2005);


Search Summary: 

The application was instituted by way of
chamber summons under ord.37 rr1and 9 of
civil procedure rules seeking an order for a
temporary injunction restraining the
respondent from disposing of the applicants
The applicant had defaulted to pay the
respondents money.

Headnote and Holding: 

The court considered whether there was
grounds warranting the grant of the application
.the court held that the property which is a
subject of dispute in a suit must be in danger of
being wasted, damaged or alienated by the any
party to the suit or wrongfully sold in
execution of a decree. The court further held
that where there is doubt on a prima facie case,
substantial loss and preservation of status quo,
the court ought to decide the matter on balance
of convenience. The court having found that
the property was part of the residential of the
applicant and his family and once disposed of
will lose more than the respondent the
application was allowed.
Accordingly the application was granted.


Subscribe to RSS - Injunctions and interdicts