KAMPALA, Uganda | Failure to see WhatsApp blue ticks is the reason the High Court of Uganda set aside a judgment obtained by Seroma Limited against one of its suppliers, Tusubira Joseph Waisswa. The ruling, delivered by Hon. Lady Justice Patricia Kahigi Asiimwe, brings to light the limitations of using WhatsApp for serving court documents when there is no evidence that the recipient actually read the message.

Seroma Limited had sued Mr. Tusubira, seeking recovery of an unpaid debt related to maize supplies. The company secured a default judgment after alleging that Mr. Tusubira was served with the summons via WhatsApp but did not respond. Mr. Tusubira contested this, claiming he was unaware of the lawsuit as he never read the message due to his phone being damaged at the time.

Justice Asiimwe reviewed the affidavit of service, which included a screenshot of the WhatsApp message sent to Mr. Tusubira. Although the message was sent, it did not display the blue ticks indicating that it had been read. Under the Constitution (Integration of ICT into the Adjudication Processes for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2019, electronic service is valid only if there is clear proof of receipt. In this case, the absence of blue ticks raised doubts about whether Mr. Tusubira was ever made aware of the summons.

The court noted that effective service is crucial for ensuring the defendant has a fair opportunity to respond. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Geoffrey Gatete & Anor v. William Kyobe, Justice Asiimwe emphasized that proper service requires proof that the defendant received and read the summons. Without this confirmation, the court could not assume that Mr. Tusubira had been properly notified.

The process server also claimed to have served Mr. Tusubira in person, but this assertion was not supported by any additional evidence, such as photographs or an acknowledgment of receipt. Under the Civil Procedure Rules, physical service must be acknowledged by the recipient. In its absence, and without the confirmation of blue ticks on WhatsApp, the court found the service ineffective.

This ruling raises the practical challenges of using digital platforms like WhatsApp for legal notifications. While electronic service methods can be efficient, they depend on features like read receipts to confirm delivery, which can be unreliable if the recipient does not open the message.

Given the lack of evidence proving effective service, the High Court set aside the default judgment. Justice Asiimwe granted Mr. Tusubira unconditional leave to defend the suit, allowing him to present his case, including the argument that the debt was owed by Watujo Agro Produce Limited, a company he directs, rather than by him personally.