Wakilii

Andereya Kwekubaho V Bahemuka (Civil Suit No.38 of 1984)

High Court · [1991] UGHC 14 · 1991 Preliminary Objection Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection by defendant that the suit was not properly registered before the High Court
Decision
Preliminary objection dismissed; case to proceed

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 overruled the preliminary objection that the suit was improperly filed due to alleged non-payment of fees. The court accepted the District Registrar's minute that fees had been paid at Rwebisengo Magistrates Court and found no evidence to contradict this. The court held that the suit was properly registered with requisite jurisdiction. However, the court held that the Grade I Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to entertain applications and make orders in the High Court file, as such preliminary steps must be handled by the District Registrar under Order 44 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Outcome

Preliminary objection dismissed; case to proceed

Facts

The plaintiff filed a civil suit in the High Court at Fort Portal. When the case was called for hearing, the defendant's counsel raised a preliminary objection that the suit was not properly registered because court fees had not been paid. The District Registrar's minute stated that fees had been paid at Rwebisengo, but there was no registrar at Rwebisengo and no evidence of payment on the file. Defence counsel argued that without proper payment and acknowledgment by a registrar, the suit could not proceed. During the proceedings, a Grade I Magistrate had entertained and disposed of certain applications in the High Court file, including an order for committal to prison and a review application, which the defendant's counsel argued was improper as only the Chief Magistrate/District Registrar had delegated High Court powers.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit was properly before the High Court given the alleged non-payment of court fees.
  2. Whether a Grade I Magistrate had jurisdiction to entertain and make orders on applications in a High Court file on behalf of the Chief Magistrate/District Registrar.

Orders

  • The preliminary objection that the case was not properly registered before the court is overruled.
  • Costs of the preliminary objection awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Filing of Suits — Payment of Fees — Registrar's Acknowledgment
Where a District Registrar records in a court minute that fees have been paid at a particular location and there is no evidence to the contrary, the court will accept the integrity of the District Registrar's remark and hold that fees were properly paid.
Civil Procedure — High Court Registration — District Registries — Jurisdiction
Under Order 44 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, every suit in the High Court may be instituted at the central offices in Kampala or in a District Registry, and District Registries shall be established at such places as the Chief Justice may appoint by statutory order.
Civil Procedure — Powers of Registrars — Preliminary Steps and Interlocutory Applications
Under Order 46 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, all formal steps preliminary to trial and all interlocutory applications may be made and taken before the Registrar.
Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction of Magistrates — Delegation of High Court Powers
A Grade I Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain applications and make orders in High Court files, as such preliminary steps and interlocutory applications must be handled by the District Registrar under Order 44 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and only the Chief Magistrate is delegated powers by the High Court.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (3)

  • Babizalirwa Francis v Buyanja Tweheyo Co Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 1088 of 1988)
  • Auto Exports Ltd .V. Customs 1970 EA 648
  • Moro Okola v John Lalobo (Court of Appeal No. 21 of 1978)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Andereya Kwekubaho V Bahemuka (Civil Suit No.38 of 1984) [1991] UGHC 14 (11 December 1991)
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.