Wakilii

Ali Abdalla and Another v Ahmed Abdul and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 007 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 832 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside consent judgment arising from civil suit
Decision
Consent judgment set aside; parties to revert to position as ordered by trial Judge in the main suit

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 set aside a consent judgment entered by an Assistant Registrar, finding it was entered illegally without proper judicial authority, by collusion, and through misapprehension of material facts. The court held that the Assistant Registrar exceeded her mandate by endorsing a consent judgment in a matter pending hearing before a Judge without directions from that Judge, contrary to the Judicature (Mediation) Rules 2013. The court also overruled a preliminary objection regarding the 2nd applicant's attorney, holding that a statutory declaration sufficiently clarified that different names referred to the same person where there was no actual change of name.

Outcome

Consent judgment set aside; parties to revert to position as ordered by trial Judge in the main suit

Facts

The applicants sought to set aside a consent judgment entered on 17 December 2015 in Civil Suit No. 11 of 2012. The consent judgment was signed by counsel for both parties and by the 2nd applicant and 2nd respondent, but not by the 1st applicant or 1st respondent. The 1st applicant averred he was not involved in the process and never signed the consent. The 2nd applicant averred her counsel never explained the terms and made her believe the contents protected her rights, when they were different. After the consent judgment, the applicants continued to use the suit land, surveyed it, and applied to convert it from customary to freehold tenure. The 2nd respondent opposed this and wrote to land authorities in 2023. The matter had been referred by the trial Judge to the Assistant Registrar for mediation on 4 November 2014, with the Judge fixing the matter for mention and possible hearing on 26 February 2015. However, the matter remained before the Assistant Registrar who endorsed the consent judgment without returning it to the Judge. A preliminary objection was raised that the 2nd applicant's attorney lacked capacity because the power of attorney was given by a person with a different name (Abdu Mariam) than the 2nd applicant (Nimoda Abdalla).

Issues

  1. Whether the court should set aside the consent judgment in Civil Suit No. 11 of 2012 entered on 17 December 2015?
  2. What remedies are available?
  3. Whether the 2nd applicant's attorney has legal capacity to act on behalf of the 2nd applicant (preliminary objection)?

Orders

  • The consent judgment was entered illegally, by collusion, and misapprehension of material facts.
  • The consent judgment is hereby set aside.
  • All parties should revert to the position as ordered by the trial Judge in HCCS No. 011 of 2015.
  • Costs in the application will abide in the main cause.
  • Preliminary objection overruled.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Consent Judgments — Setting Aside — Grounds
A consent judgment may be set aside if obtained by fraud or collusion, by an agreement contrary to the policy of the court, if consent was given without sufficient material facts or in misapprehension or ignorance of material facts, or for any reason which would enable the court to set aside an agreement.
Civil Procedure — Mediation — Powers of Registrar — Endorsement of Consent Judgment
Where a matter is referred to a Registrar for mediation, the Registrar acts as a mediator and not as a court. Under the Judicature (Mediation) Rules 2013, if mediation succeeds, the settlement must be endorsed by the court exercising civil jurisdiction, which in a matter already before a Judge means endorsement by that Judge or by the Registrar if specifically directed by the Judge. A Registrar has no power to endorse a consent judgment in a matter pending hearing before a Judge without directions from that Judge.
Civil Procedure — Representation — Authority of Advocates — Binding Effect
While the actions of an advocate generally bind a party to a suit under Order 3 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, where there is evidence suggesting lack of instructions or collusion, and where a party did not sign a consent judgment and there is no minute showing the party appeared in court for endorsement, the court may find that counsel lacked instructions to enter the settlement.
Administrative Law — Names and Identity — Statutory Declarations — Use of Different Names
A statutory declaration is sufficient to clarify that a person is known by different names where there is no actual change of name. The procedure for formal change of name by deed poll and gazette notice under the Registration of Persons Act applies only where a person wishes to change from one name to another, not where a person clarifies that different names refer to the same person.

Legislation cited (12)

Cases cited (9)

  • Hirani v Kassani (1952) 19 EACA 131
  • Attorney General and Another v James Mark Kamoga and Another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2004)
  • Hashim Sulaiman v Onega Robert (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 001 of 2012)
  • Achola v Electoral Commission (Election Petition No. 2 of 2018)
  • Robert Migadde v Musoke Tadco and Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 109 of 2017)
  • Musisi Nakibinge and Others v Kikulywe Ahmed and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 77 of 2024)
  • Nambusi Jameo v Kato Yuda and Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 141 of 2014)
  • Kamanda Bukenya v Edith Nakandi and Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 0775 of 2017)
  • Attorney General & Uganda Land Commission vs James Mark Kamoga & Anor

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ali Abdalla and Another v Ahmed Abdul and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 007 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 832 (4 September 2025)
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.