Wakilii

Byesigirwoha v Tumuranye (Miscellaneous Application 3003 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 293 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal an interlocutory order refusing leave to amend pleadings
Decision
Application for leave to appeal dismissed

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 dismissed an application for leave to appeal against an interlocutory order that had refused leave to amend pleadings. The applicant failed to demonstrate arguable grounds meriting appellate consideration or reasonable prospects of success. The four-year delay in seeking amendment evidenced dilatory conduct and the application came as an afterthought, constituting an abuse of court process.

Outcome

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Facts

The respondent filed Civil Suit No. 186 of 2020 against the applicant, who filed his written statement of defence on 25 March 2020. In April 2024, amid the hearing, the applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 903 of 2024 seeking leave to amend his pleadings and introduce a counterclaim. That application was dismissed on 20 August 2024 on grounds that the applicant failed to provide satisfactory explanation for lack of diligence, did not justify the amendment after considerable delay, the suit had been partially heard, and the application lacked good faith. The applicant then sought leave to appeal that ruling, arguing he filed his original defence in rush and stress, and that the refusal to allow amendment was unjust and prejudicial.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has grounds of appeal which merit serious consideration of the Court of Appeal?

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Leave to Appeal — Requirements for Grant of Leave
An applicant for leave to appeal must demonstrate that the intended appeal raises arguable grounds of appeal which require serious judicial consideration by the appellate court and must show reasonable prospects of success, not fanciful ones.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Delay and Dilatory Conduct
An application to amend pleadings made four years after filing the original pleading, without satisfactory explanation for the delay, evidences dilatory conduct and will be refused as an afterthought. Dilatory conduct disqualifies an applicant from obtaining leave to appeal an interlocutory order refusing amendment.
Civil Procedure — Leave to Appeal — Assessment of Grounds
In assessing an application for leave to appeal, the court must identify and assess the seriousness and significance of the points sought to be raised on appeal. If the points are neither serious nor significant, relief will usually not be granted. The court must also consider whether there has been significant misdirection on law or fact, and must have regard to the need for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (7)

  • Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 5 of 1994)
  • Sango Bay Estates ltd case
  • Bandali t/a Shimoni Enterprises v Wills
  • Ayebazibwe v Barclays Bank Uganda Ltd and 3 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 292 of 2014)
  • Across African Clearing and Forwarding Co. Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 0003 of 2012)
  • Degeya Trading Stores (U) Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 16 of 1996)
  • Southern Union Insurance Broker Ltd and 3 Others v Niko Insurance (U) Limited (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 0568 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Byesigirwoha_v_Tumuranye_(Miscellaneous_Application_3003_of_2024)_[2024]_UGHCLD_293_(10_December_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.