Wakilii

Imelda Kemigisa v Katabarwa Samuel and Another (Civil Appeal No. 257 of 2021)

Court of Appeal · [2025] UGCA 330 · 2025 Appeal Struck Out ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Second civil appeal from the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction; struck out on a preliminary objection without determination of the merits.
Decision
Appeal struck out on the preliminary objection without determination of the merits; costs to the respondents

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full 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

On a respondent's preliminary objection, the Court of Appeal struck out a second appeal for the appellant's dilatory conduct. Having obtained a stay of execution in 2019 and filed her record of appeal in 2021, the appellant took no step to fix the appeal, failed to file conferencing notes despite service, and did not attend the scheduling conference. The Court held that filing conferencing notes is now a procedural rule and good case management, and that the appellant's reluctance was intended to deny the successful party the fruits of judgments standing since 1998. The objection was upheld and the appeal struck out with costs to the respondents here and in the courts below. The grounds of appeal were not determined on their merits.

Facts

The respondents' late father, Kwebiha William, obtained judgments in the Local Council Courts and applied in the Chief Magistrate's Court (LM-034 of 2008) for execution against the appellant. The Chief Magistrate set aside an LCII judgment, struck the appellant from that record, and ordered execution of an LCI judgment of Miranga village dated 23 September 1998. The appellant's appeal to the High Court (Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2016) was dismissed and the lower court's orders upheld. The appellant brought a second appeal to the Court of Appeal in 2021, challenging the Chief Magistrate's power to order execution of the LCI judgment. Having obtained a stay of execution in 2019, the appellant filed her record of appeal but thereafter took no step to fix the appeal. She failed to file conferencing notes despite being served in July 2024, and did not attend the scheduling conference. The respondents wrote to the Registrar in June 2024 to progress the matter and filed their conferencing notes.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant's failure to fix the appeal for hearing, file conferencing notes and attend the scheduling conference amounted to dilatory conduct warranting that the appeal be struck out.

Orders

  • The respondent's preliminary objection is upheld.
  • The appeal is struck out with costs to the respondents here and in the courts below.

Key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Dilatory Conduct — Striking Out for Failure to Prosecute
An appellant who secures a stay of execution but then fails over a prolonged period to fix the appeal for hearing, file conferencing notes despite service, and attend the scheduling conference engages in dilatory conduct, and the appeal may be struck out on the opposing party's preliminary objection.
Civil Procedure — Court of Appeal — Conferencing Notes as a Procedural Rule
The filing of conferencing notes before an appeal is fixed for hearing is a requirement of good case management and has become a court practice amounting to a procedural rule, equivalent to a scheduling conference, and failure to comply is a default the court will not condone.
Civil Procedure — Second Appeals — Duty of the Court under Rule 32(2)
On a second appeal from the High Court acting in its appellate jurisdiction, the Court of Appeal may appraise inferences of fact but cannot interfere with findings of fact supported by evidence; it may interfere only where there was no evidence to support a finding, that being a question of law.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Local Council Courts Act 2006 ss.25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31
  • Local Council Courts Act 2006 s.40
  • Civil Procedure Act s.35(1)(a)
  • Court of Appeal Rules r.32(2)

Cases cited (5)

  • Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
  • Umeme Limited v Dr. J. F. Kwomuhute (Civil Appeal No. 208 of 2016)
  • Tororo Cement Co. Ltd v Forkina International Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 01 of 2007)
  • David Dweket v Okonge Mustafa and Okita Ibrahim (Civil Application No. 770 of 2009)
  • Andrew Mavile v Jomayi Property Consultants Ltd (Civil Application No. 274 of 2014)
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.