Wakilii

Abitakeniza v Monday (CIVIL SUIT NO.942 OF 2015)

High Court · [2018] UGHCCD 34 · 2018 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from a decision of the Deputy Registrar dismissing the appellant's counterclaim for lack of suit number
Decision
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

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

The High Court dismissed an appeal from the Deputy Registrar's decision for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The court held that Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, which grants inherent jurisdiction, cannot be invoked to create appellate jurisdiction. Appellate jurisdiction is a creature of statute and must be specifically created by law. The appeal was incompetent.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

Facts

The respondent filed Civil Suit No. 017 of 2014 against the appellant in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Entebbe. The appellant filed a defence and subsequently a counterclaim which exceeded the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Chief Magistrate's Court. The appellant requested that the file be transferred to the High Court. Before the transfer was completed, the respondent withdrew his original suit. The Deputy Registrar, Fred Waninda, then dismissed the appellant's counterclaim on the ground that it had no suit number. The appellant sought to appeal this decision to the High Court, relying on Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act which provides for inherent jurisdiction.

Issues

  1. Whether the High Court has appellate jurisdiction to entertain an appeal based on Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act against a Deputy Registrar's decision dismissing a counterclaim.
  2. Whether the Deputy Registrar erred in dismissing the appellant's counterclaim on grounds that it had no suit number.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed as incompetent.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appellate Jurisdiction — Creation by Statute
A right of appeal is a creature of statute and must be specifically created by law. There is no inherent appellate jurisdiction.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Jurisdiction — Limits of Section 98
Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, which confers inherent jurisdiction on courts to make orders necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process, cannot be invoked to create appellate jurisdiction where none exists by statute.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Baku Raphael v Attorney General (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Abitakeniza v Monday (CIVIL SUIT NO.942 OF 2015) [2018] UGHCCD 34 (25 May 2018)
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.