The Kabaka of Buganda v Kibuule Ronald & Another (Civil Appeal 369 of 2021)

Court of Appeal · [2025] UGCA 60 · 2025 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

First appeal from a High Court ruling dismissing an application to review the judgment, decree and orders in Civil Suit 153 of 2019, to which the appellant was not a party

Decision

Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; each party to bear own costs

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 dismissed the appeal without considering its merits because neither party filed the written submissions the Court had directed within the timeframes set. The Court held that an appeal can only be determined once the parties argue the framed grounds through submissions identifying the lower court decisions complained of; the parties' failure to file signified they were no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal. Noting that the appeal raised complex issues concerning land owned by traditional rulers and that the Namasole (a relative of the appellant) was not a party, the Court inferred the parties may have resolved the dispute amicably and that the appeal was no longer necessary.

Facts

The first respondent filed Civil Suit 153 of 2019 against the second respondent (the Commissioner Land Registration) seeking declarations that he was a bona fide purchaser for value of land at Kyaggwe Block 369 Plot 10 at Golomolo, that the deletion of his name from the certificate of title was illegal, and an order restoring his name to the title, plus general damages and costs. The High Court decided in the plaintiff's favour and ordered restoration of his name. The appellant, the Kabaka of Buganda, was not a party to that suit. He filed an application to review the judgment, which David Batema J dismissed on 12 July 2021 for lack of merit. The appellant appealed that ruling. At the hearing the Court regularised the appeal under Rule 42. The Court directed the parties to file submissions, but neither party did so.

Issues

Whether the appeal could be determined where both parties failed to file the submissions directed by the Court.

Orders

The Appeal is hereby dismissed.
Each party to bear their own costs in this Appeal.

Key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Non-prosecution — Failure to file directed submissions

An appeal can only be determined upon the parties arguing the framed grounds through submissions identifying the lower court decisions complained of; where parties fail to file submissions as directed, that failure signifies they are no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal and it may be dismissed.

Legislation cited (2)

Court of Appeal Rules r.42
Traditional Rulers (Restoration of Assets and Properties) Act Cap 247

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.