Good man Agencies Limited v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application No. 131 of 2021) [2021] UGCommC 130 (4 January 2021)


# **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**

# **(COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION)**

**MISC APPLICATION 131 OF 2021**

**(ARISING FROM MA 659 OF 2012)**

**(ARISING FROM MA 355 OF 2012)**

**(ARISING FROM HCCS 719 OF 1997)**

**GOODMAN AGENCIES LTD……………………………….…APPLICANT**

## **VERSUS**

**1. ATTORNEY GENERAL ………………………………RESPONDENT**

#### **BEFORE THE HON. MR. JUSTICE RICHARD WEJULI WABWIRE**

#### **RULING**

This Application was brought under section 98 CPA and Order 52 rules 1, 2 and 3 CPR seeking orders that a consent variation order entered by the parties be endorsed by this Court.

Franklin Uwizera – State Attorney holding brief for George Kalemera-Commissioner for Civil Litigation at the Attorney General's Cambers, appeared for the Respondents while Saad Seninde and Esta Tayebwa appeared for the Applicants.

The Applicants were represented by three shareholders, namely;

1. Mark Mutibwa National ID No. CM93031101NY , Card No. 020643983

- 2. Carlson Ngolobe- who said he had lost his National Identity Card. Counsel Esta Tayebwa and Saad Seninde confirmed his identity and undertook to place a copy of his driving permit on file. - 3. Nicholas Were National ID card no. CM630121010U0D, Card No. 000956181

The Respondent was represented by Tereza Namwach, a Principal Economist which the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development ( Government of Uganda), ID No. 008/461 issued/signed by the Permanent Secretary / Secretary to the Treasury.

The Application is supported by the Affidavit of Edward Labeja , an Advocate working with Okecha Baranyanga & Co Advocates who are counsel for the Applicants.

The grounds for the Application stated therein briefly are that the parties have agreed to lower the interest awarded on the consented decretal amount from 6% per annum to 3% per annum and that for the variation to be enforceable, Court ought to endorse the Consent Variation.

The Application is not contested and Counsel for the Respondents confirmed that the terms thereof had been arrived at following a meeting between the parties and were agreeable to the Respondents.

The parties have signed the Consent Variation Order and now seek courts endorsement.

I have confirmed from the representatives of the parties who were present in court that they attended the negotiation meetings that indeed what is expressed in the Consent Variation Order and in this Application is their free will and desire.

I have also satisfied myself, from the Ruling of Justice Musota, J, as he then was, delivered in **MA 361 of 2015**, that indeed the parties entered a Consent Judgment by which the Applicants were awarded the sums indicated in the Consent Variation order now before this court.

In my opinion, the proposed Consent Variation does not prejudice either parties since they amicably agreed to the terms thereof.

In the event, in exercise of this Courts mandate under section 98 CPA, the prayer sought to have the Consent Variation Order endorsed is granted.

Each party will bear its own costs.

Delivered at Kampala and signed copies for the parties placed on file this 4 th day of January, 2021.

………………………………………………………

## **RICHARD WEJULI WABWIRE**

**JUDGE**