Samwili Kibuuka v Eriya Lugeya Lubanga (Civil Appeal No 211 of 2013)

Court of Appeal · [2019] UGCA 2121 · 2019 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

Civil appeal called for hearing; respondent applied for dismissal for want of prosecution following the appellant's non-appearance

Decision

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the respondent

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 respondent applied to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution under Rule 100(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the appellant and his advocates being absent at the hearing despite service. The court found that the appellant's advocates remained on record and had been duly served per the affidavit of service, yet neither they nor the appellant attended or explained their absence. The court inferred the appellant had lost interest in the appeal, which had been filed in 2013 and not prosecuted. The appeal was accordingly dismissed for lack of prosecution, with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The original suit came before court in 2001 and the appeal was filed in 2013. When the appeal was called for hearing on 12 November 2019, counsel for the respondent appeared but the appellant and his advocates were absent. According to an affidavit of service dated 12 November 2019 sworn by Kyambadde Ali, service was effected on 11 October 2019 on the appellant's advocates, who refused to receive it claiming they had lost instructions and lost contact with their client. The court noted that those advocates remained on record for the appellant and had not indicated to court why they were not present. The respondent, though sick, had sent his two sons, and counsel submitted the matter had been in court for a long time.

Issues

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution where the appellant and his counsel failed to appear after being served.

Orders

Civil Appeal No. 211 of 2013 dismissed for want of prosecution.
Appellant to pay costs of the appeal to the respondent.

Key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Dismissal for Want of Prosecution — Rule 100(1) Court of Appeal Rules

Where an appellant and his advocates, who remain on record and have been duly served, fail to appear at the hearing of the appeal and offer no explanation, the court may infer that the appellant has lost interest and dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution under Rule 100(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Advocates on Record — Effect of Service Despite Loss of Instructions

Advocates who are on record for a party remain so until properly discharged; service effected on such advocates binds the party even where the advocates claim to have lost instructions and contact with the client.

Legislation cited (1)

Court of Appeal Rules (Judicature) r.100(1)

Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.