Abim District Local Government and Another v Oryono Johnny Bomex T/A Adams Palace Enterprises (Miscellaneous Application Number 0012 of 2024)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
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
An application to set aside an Assistant Registrar's orders must be brought by way of appeal under Order 50 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, not as a miscellaneous application under inherent jurisdiction. Where Order 50 rule 8 provides an express procedural route by notice of motion appeal, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and section 14(2)(c) of the Judicature Act cannot be invoked. The application was dismissed for lack of proper legal foundation.
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Facts
The applicants sought to set aside the Assistant Registrar's orders in Miscellaneous Application No. 9 of 2024 and to obtain leave to file a Written Statement of Defence out of time in Civil Suit No. 1 of 2024. The applicants contended they were not properly served with summons to file defence, as the officer who received service did not bring it to the attention of the accounting officer. The respondent opposed the application, asserting that service was duly effected on 19 March 2024 by a court process server and that the applicants' negligence did not constitute just cause. The application arose from an underlying contractual dispute between the parties.
Issues
- Whether the orders of the Assistant Registrar should be set aside.
- Whether the applicants should be granted leave to file a Written Statement of Defence out of time.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (12)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 as amended Article 126(2)(e)
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Civil Procedure Act s.96
- Judicature Act s.33
- Judicature Act s.38
- Judicature Act s.14(2)(c)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 50
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 50 r.8
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.2
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.3
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 5 r.1(2)
Cases cited (3)
- Geoffrey Gatete and Another v William Kyobe (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005)
- Sendege Senyendo and Co Advocates Vs Kampala Capital City Authority
- Khainza and 4 Others v Mweru Mike Henry (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 437 of 2023)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.