Wakilii

Batte v Nyanzi (Miscellaneous Application 2597 of 2023)

High Court · [2024] UGCOMMC 241 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enlargement of time to appeal against a taxation ruling arising from Civil Suit No. 421 of 2013
Decision
Application for enlargement of time dismissed with costs to the 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 dismissed the application for enlargement of time to appeal against a taxation ruling. The applicant claimed he was abroad when the matter was heard and could not instruct new counsel in time. The court found that the applicant provided no evidence proving he was out of the country at the relevant time. Time extensions are discretionary and granted only where sufficient cause is shown; mere assertion without supporting evidence does not constitute sufficient cause.

Outcome

Application for enlargement of time dismissed with costs to the respondent

Facts

The applicant was the plaintiff in Civil Suit No. 421 of 2013, which was decided in his favour, but the court ordered him to pay costs to the respondent who had been wrongly sued. The respondent filed a bill of costs which was taxed. The applicant claimed he was abroad during the taxation and could not challenge the costs. He also stated he was represented by his former lawyers from whom he had withdrawn instructions. After returning to Uganda, he instructed new counsel who advised there were grounds to appeal the taxing master's decision. The applicant sought an extension of time to file an appeal against the taxation ruling delivered on 20 April 2023. The respondent contended that both parties' lawyers appeared before the taxing master, and that there was no proof the applicant was abroad.

Issues

  1. Whether the time within which to file an appeal against the taxation ruling in Civil Suit No. 421 of 2013 should be enlarged.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Enlargement of Time — Sufficient Cause Required
The court has discretion under Order 51 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules to enlarge time for taking proceedings, but such extension is not granted as a matter of course and requires proof of good cause showing that the justice of the matter warrants the extension.
Civil Procedure — Enlargement of Time — Burden of Proof on Applicant
When an application is made for enlargement of time, the evidence in support must be carefully scrutinized, and the applicant bears the burden of making it absolutely plain through evidence that they are entitled to the extension; mere assertions without supporting evidence do not constitute sufficient cause.
Civil Procedure — Enlargement of Time — Inability to Constitute Sufficient Cause Must Relate to Failure to Take Necessary Steps Within Prescribed Time
Sufficient cause for extension of time must relate to the inability or failure to take the necessary steps within the prescribed time and does not relate to taking a wrong decision; if the applicant is found to be guilty of dilatory conduct, time will not be extended.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Hadondi Daniel v Yolam Egondi (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 67 of 2003)
  • Sseruwuge Charles v Kinoni Traders' Cooperative Savings Credit Society (Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2020)
  • Deborah Nt Kyanda v Dr. D. B. Kyegombe (Deceased) & Mrs. B. V. Kyegombe (Miscellaneous Application No. 1493 of 2021)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Batte v Nyanzi (Miscellaneous Application 2597 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 241 (16 July 2024)
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.