Wakilii

Amrali and Others v Shell (Uganda) Limited (Civil Application No. 50 of 2001)

Court of Appeal · [2004] UGCA 63 · 2004 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against a High Court decision; hearing of a preliminary objection subsequently withdrawn
Decision
Preliminary objection withdrawn with leave; applicant awarded costs of the day

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

Counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection that the application for leave to appeal was not properly before the court, then withdrew it after verifying that the required notice of motion had in fact been filed. The Court granted leave to withdraw the preliminary objection. However, finding that a little diligence by respondent's counsel would have avoided the objection and the resulting waste of court time, the Court awarded the applicant the costs of the day in any event.

Outcome

Preliminary objection withdrawn with leave; applicant awarded costs of the day

Facts

The applicants sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against a High Court decision made on 30 September 2003 in Miscellaneous Application No. 257 of 2003, arising from H.C.C.S. No. 61 of 1993. At the hearing on 30 July 2004, counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection that the application was not properly before the court, contending that the procedural requirements had not been complied with, including that no notice of motion had been filed in the High Court applying for leave to appeal. Counsel for the applicant responded, and the court adjourned to prepare a ruling. That afternoon, respondent's counsel wrote to the Registrar confirming that, on checking his file, the notice of motion had in fact been filed, apologising for the error and withdrawing the objection. Applicant's counsel confirmed no objection to the withdrawal, provided the applicant was awarded the costs of the day.

Issues

  1. Whether the preliminary objection that the application for leave to appeal was not properly before the court could be withdrawn by counsel for the respondent.
  2. Whether the applicant was entitled to the costs of the day on which the withdrawn objection was raised.

Orders

  • The application to withdraw the preliminary objection is granted.
  • The costs of that day are granted to the applicant in any event.

Rules and key headnotes

Costs — Withdrawal of Preliminary Objection — Award of Costs of the Day Where Objection Avoidable
Where a preliminary objection is withdrawn because it could have been avoided by reasonable diligence on the part of counsel raising it, the court may award the opposing party the costs of the day occasioned by the objection in any event.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Rules of the Court of Appeal Order 40 rule 1(3) and (4)
  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 39(1) and (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Amrali and Others v Shell (Uganda) Limited (Civil Application No. 50 of 2001) [2004] UGCA 63 (4 August 2004)
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.