Wakilii

Ariong v Angina and DTB (u) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1452 of 2021)

High Court · [2023] UGCOMMC 5 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enlargement of time to file appeal from judgment in Civil Suit No. 76 of 2018
Decision
Application struck out with costs to the 1st Respondent

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 Court struck out an application for enlargement of time to appeal where the applicant amended a Notice of Motion from seeking leave to appeal to seeking extension of time. The Court found the amendment introduced a new cause of action and was not made in good faith, constituting grounds for striking out under the Court's inherent powers.

Outcome

Application struck out with costs to the 1st Respondent

Facts

The applicant sought to appeal a judgment in Civil Suit No. 76 of 2018 where damages totalling UGX 400,000,000 had been awarded against him and the 2nd respondent. The applicant initially filed a Notice of Motion on 2 November 2021 seeking leave to appeal. While attempting to negotiate an amicable settlement, the applicant discovered his former lawyers had not lodged the appeal. On 17 January 2022, the applicant filed an amended Notice of Motion seeking enlargement of time to appeal. The 1st respondent raised preliminary objections that the amendment introduced a new cause of action and that the original application had expired after 21 days without being prosecuted.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for enlargement of time to file an appeal was incompetent.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application struck out for introducing a new cause of action.
  • Costs of the application to be borne by the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Introduction of New Cause of Action
An amendment that changes the cause of action from seeking leave to appeal to seeking extension of time to appeal introduces a new cause of action and will not be permitted under Order VI Rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules where it is not made in good faith.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Good Faith Requirement
An application for amendment of pleadings must be made in good faith and the Court will refuse to allow an amendment where it finds the application has not been made bona fide.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers — Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act
The Court may invoke its inherent powers under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to strike out an application that introduces a new cause of action where necessary for the ends of justice.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (1)

  • Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Martin Adola Obene (SC Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ariong v Angina and DTB (u) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1452 of 2021) [2023] UGCommC 5 (11 January 2023)
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.