Wakilii

Bridge Investments Limited v Middles East Hospital and Shopping Complex Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2019)

High Court · [2019] UGHCCD 321 · 2019 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for extension of time to seek leave to appeal and for leave to appeal against ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 634 of 2015
Decision
Applicant granted leave to appeal and extension of time to lodge appeal

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 granted the applicant leave to appeal and extended time to lodge the appeal. The court held that leave to appeal should be granted where prima facie there are grounds of appeal which merit serious judicial consideration. The applicant's contention that the court awarded a sum less than what was admitted by the respondent raised grounds meriting consideration and warranted protection of the right of appeal to attain the ends of justice.

Outcome

Applicant granted leave to appeal and extension of time to lodge appeal

Facts

The applicant sought extension of time to seek leave to appeal and leave to appeal against a ruling delivered on 27 January 2016 in Miscellaneous Application No. 634 of 2015. After the ruling, the applicant filed an application for review on 25 February 2016. During this period, the High Court at Nakawa was phased out and files were transferred to the Civil Division. The review application came up for hearing on 19 November 2018, when the court advised the applicant to file an appeal instead. The applicant withdrew the review application after the respondent's counsel indicated no objection to time extension. The underlying dispute concerned a court order awarding the applicant a sum less than what had been admitted by the respondent in earlier proceedings.

Issues

  1. Whether there are sufficient grounds to grant leave to appeal against the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 634 of 2015.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Applicants granted leave to file the appeal.
  • Time to lodge the appeal is accordingly granted.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Leave to Appeal — Test for Grant
Leave to appeal from an order in civil proceedings will normally be granted where prima facie it appears that there are grounds of appeal which merit serious judicial consideration, and where the prospect of success is realistic rather than fanciful.
Leave to Appeal — Attainment of Justice
Leave to appeal should be granted where necessary to protect the applicant's right of appeal and for attaining the ends of justice, particularly where the intending appellant's feelings of injustice are arguably objectively justified.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Sango Bay Estate v Dresdner Bank and Attorney General
  • Swain v Hillman [2001] 1 All ER 91
  • Degeya Trading Stores (U) Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Application No. 16 of 1996)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Bridge Investments Limited v Middles East Hospital and Shopping Complex Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2019) [2019] UGHCCD 321 (12 July 2019)
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.