Wakilii

Asiku Godfrey Ayikosi and Others v Anguzu Jimmy Keita Kassaja (Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2022)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 856 · 2025 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Chief Magistrate's Court judgment on trespass to land
Decision
Appeal dismissed as incompetent for being filed out of time without leave of court

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

An appeal to the High Court from a Magistrate's Court must be commenced by filing a memorandum of appeal within thirty days of the decree or order under Section 79(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 43 Rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. A notice of appeal does not commence an appeal in the High Court; it merely expresses intention to appeal and must be filed in the lower court. Where a memorandum of appeal is filed out of time without leave of court, the appeal is incompetent and must be struck out.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as incompetent for being filed out of time without leave of court

Facts

The respondent sued the appellants in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Arua for trespass on approximately four acres of land in Oluko, Arua District, claiming to have inherited the land from his late father. The appellants denied the claim, asserting the land belonged to the estate of the late Peter Abinyi Adroni. The trial magistrate found for the respondent, declared the appellants trespassers, awarded general damages of UGX 20,000,000, and issued eviction orders and an injunction. The appellants filed a notice of appeal on 26 September 2022 and a memorandum of appeal on 28 November 2022, more than two months after the judgment was delivered on 26 September 2022.

Issues

  1. Whether the appeal was properly filed within the time prescribed by law.
  2. Whether a notice of appeal is sufficient to commence an appeal in the High Court from a Magistrate's Court judgment.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Commencement of Appeal — Memorandum of Appeal Required
An appeal to the High Court from a Magistrate's Court judgment must be commenced by filing a memorandum of appeal, not a notice of appeal, in accordance with Order 43 Rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Thirty-Day Period Mandatory
Under Section 79(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Act, every appeal must be entered within thirty days from the date of the decree or order, and this requirement is mandatory as indicated by the use of the word 'shall' in the statute.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Notice of Appeal — Function and Effect
A notice of appeal is an expression of intention to appeal and must be filed in the lower court to enable preparation of the record of proceedings, but it does not commence an appeal in the High Court.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Filing Out of Time — Incompetence Without Leave
An appeal filed out of time without leave of court is incompetent and will be struck out.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Pure Points of Law
A preliminary objection raises a pure point of law argued on the assumption that all facts pleaded are correct, and it cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained or if what is sought is the exercise of judicial discretion.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.79(1)(a)
  • Civil Procedure Rules S.I. No. 71-1 Order 6 Rule 28
  • Civil Procedure Rules S.I. No. 71-1 Order 6 Rule 29
  • Civil Procedure Rules S.I. No. 71-1 Order 43 Rule 1(1)

Cases cited (9)

  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd (1969) EA 697
  • Quick Enterprises Ltd Versus Kenya Airways Corporation High Court (Kisumu) Civil Case No. 22 of 1999
  • Avtar Singh Bhamra & Another Versus Oriental Commercial Bank, Kisumu High Court Civil Case No.53 of 2004
  • Uganda Telecom Ltd v ZTE Corporation (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2017)
  • Geoffrey Nangumya T/a Nangumya & Co. Advocates Versus Security Plus (U) Ltd HCMA No. 858 of 2021
  • Maria Onyango Ochola and others v. J. Hannington Wasswa [1996] HCB 43
  • Loi Kageni Kiryapawo v. Gole Nicholas Davis, S. C. Miscellaneous Civil Application No.15 of 2007
  • Hajj Mohammed Nyanzi v. Ali Sseggane [1992 - 1993] HCB 218
  • Equity Bank Uganda Ltd Versus Nicholas Were HCMA No. 604 of 2013

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Asiku Godfrey Ayikosi and Others v Anguzu Jimmy Keita Kassaja (Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 856 (14 August 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.