Atim Esther Owonda v Rukia Safi Rembe (Civil Appeal No. 81 of 2022)
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 struck out the appeal for being filed out of time. The decree was entered on 14 July 2022 and the memorandum of appeal was filed on 19 August 2022, thirty-six days later, exceeding the thirty-day statutory limit under Section 79(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. The appellant neither sought an extension of time nor advanced reasons for the delay. Statutory time limits are mandatory and must be strictly complied with.
Outcome
Appeal struck out for being filed out of time
Facts
The respondent filed a summary suit in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Arua seeking to recover UGX 13,711,000 borrowed from her by the appellant. The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking leave to appear and defend, but the trial court dismissed the application for non-appearance and entered a decree against the appellant on 14 July 2022. The appellant filed a memorandum of appeal on 19 August 2022. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal was filed out of time, being thirty-six days after the decree instead of the statutory thirty days. The appellant did not file submissions in rejoinder to address the objection.
Issues
- Whether the appeal was filed within the statutory time limit prescribed under Section 79(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Orders
- Appeal struck out.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.79(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules S.I. No. 71-1 Order 6 Rule 28
- Civil Procedure Rules S.I. No. 71-1 Order 6 Rule 29
Cases cited (7)
- 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)
- Ssekazi Godfrey v Kyeyune David (Civil Appeal No. 109 of 2015)
- Uganda Revenue Authority Vs Uganda Consolidated Properties Ltd (1977-2000) UCLR 149
- Re-Application of Mustapha Ramathan, Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1996
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.