Uganda Corporation Creameries Ltd and Another v Reamaton Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1998)
The full judgment
Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court of Appeal declined to grant an adjournment of the appeal, holding that there was no competent appeal before it to adjourn. The notice of appeal, which commences an appeal, had already been struck out on 1 July 1998, and without a notice of appeal there can be no appeal. The court accordingly struck out the purported appeal as incompetent and awarded costs to the respondent in both the Court of Appeal and the court below.
Facts
Counsel for the appellants applied for an adjournment of the civil appeal to enable him to argue an application for leave to file a notice of appeal out of time. Counsel for the respondent opposed the adjournment, contending that there was no competent appeal before the court because the notice of appeal had been struck out by the Court of Appeal on 1 July 1998. The respondent relied on the authority of Haji Nurdin Matovu v Ben Kiwanuka and sought to have the appeal struck out under rules 81 and 101(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Issues
- Whether an adjournment could be granted where the notice of appeal had already been struck out.
- Whether there was a competent appeal before the court capable of being adjourned.
Orders
- Application for an adjournment of the appeal declined.
- Purported appeal struck out as incompetent.
- Costs to the respondent in this court and the court below.
Key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Court of Appeal Rules r.81
- Court of Appeal Rules r.101(b)
Cases cited (1)
- Haji Nurdin Matovu v Ben Kiwanuka (Civil Application No. 12 of 1991)