Atananzio Betubiza v Centenary Bank and Another (Civil Appeal No 224 of 2018)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's application for extension of time and validation of the Record of Appeal for want of prosecution. Despite clear directions to file and serve submissions within set timelines, and an express warning that non-compliance would result in dismissal, the appellant took no steps for over two months and never filed his submissions. As the appeal had been filed out of time and was never validated, it was incompetent and incurably defective. The Court accordingly struck out the appeal, making no order as to costs since the respondents did not attend the hearing.

Outcome

Application for extension of time and validation dismissed for want of prosecution; appeal struck out as incompetent

Facts

In August 2006 the appellant obtained a UGX 4,000,000 loan from the first respondent bank at 2% per month interest, repayable within twelve months and secured by his land at Rushoka, Ntungamo District. The bank contended the appellant defaulted despite reminders and demands, and an auctioneer sold the secured property to the second respondent for UGX 2,500,000 on 1 November 2006. The appellant challenged the sale, alleging full repayment, sale of the wrong security, and unlawful over-attachment. The Magistrate Grade I dismissed his suit with costs, and the High Court, sitting as first appellate court, dismissed his appeal. On the present second appeal, the appellant filed his Record of Appeal out of time and brought an application for extension of time and validation. When the matter came up, the Court directed him to file submissions within set timelines and warned that non-compliance would result in dismissal. He took no steps for over two months and never filed submissions.

Issues

1. Whether the application for extension of time and validation of the Record of Appeal should be granted where the applicant failed to prosecute it and to comply with the Court's directions.

Orders

• The application for extension of time and validation of the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
• The appeal, having been filed out of time and never validated, is struck out.
• No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (11)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.5
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.43
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.44
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.50
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.76(4)
• Practice Direction No. 01 of 2004 (Judicial Powers of Registrars)
• Civil Procedure Rules O.51 r.6
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Judicature Act s.33
• Constitution of Uganda Article 126(2)(e)

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