Ainebyoona Emath v Naggayi Laiton and Others [2026] UGHCLD 262
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 interlocutory application, fixed for hearing in the presence of counsel for the applicant/1st defendant, was called on. Neither the applicant nor their counsel attended and no reason was given for the absence. The court dismissed the application under Order 9 rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules and fixed the main suit for hearing on 25 November 2026. The ruling determined no substantive question of law.
Outcome
Application dismissed for non-attendance; the main suit was fixed for hearing on 25 November 2026.
Facts
The matter was an interlocutory application (Miscellaneous Application No. 3409 of 2024) arising from Civil Suit No. 899 of 2024, a land dispute. The application was fixed for hearing on 2 July 2026 in the presence of counsel for the applicant/1st defendant. On the hearing date both the applicant and their counsel failed to attend, and no reason was given for their non-attendance. The plaintiff was not a party to the application.
Orders
- Application dismissed under Order 9 rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Main suit fixed for hearing on 25 November 2026 at 10:00 a.m.
Legislation cited (1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.17
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.