Wakilii

Combined Properties Ltd v. HP GAUFF INGENIEURE GMBH & Co. & Ors (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1998)

High Court · [2016] UGHCEBD 4 · 2016 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ex parte application for extension of time to apply for order of mandamus arising from execution of judgment in HCCS No. 246 of 1998
Decision
Extension of time granted; applicant permitted to file application for order of mandamus within two weeks

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

Court granted extension of time to apply for order of mandamus where judgment creditor had been negotiating settlement with Attorney General since judgment delivery, bill of costs remained untaxed, and prescribed three-month period had expired. Application being ex parte and good reason shown for delay, extension was just and reasonable.

Outcome

Extension of time granted; applicant permitted to file application for order of mandamus within two weeks

Facts

Combined Properties Ltd obtained judgment against the Attorney General on 29 January 2015 in HCCS No. 246 of 1998. The judgment creditor had been negotiating for settlement of the decretal sum since judgment delivery without success. The bill of costs had not yet been taxed. The three-month period prescribed under rule 5 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 for applying for an order of mandamus expired while negotiations were ongoing. The applicant sought an ex parte extension of time to apply for mandamus to enforce the judgment.

Issues

  1. Whether good reason exists to extend the time within which to apply for an order of mandamus beyond the three-month period prescribed under rule 5 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Time extended for filing application for order of mandamus.
  • Applicant to file application for order of mandamus within two weeks from date of ruling.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Extension of Time — Orders of Mandamus — Good Reason for Extension
Where a judgment creditor has been negotiating settlement with the judgment debtor and the bill of costs remains untaxed, good reason exists to extend time for applying for an order of mandamus beyond the three-month period prescribed under rule 5 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009.
Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Discretion of Court — Ex Parte Applications
On an ex parte application for extension of time, where the applicant demonstrates good reason for the delay in filing within the prescribed period, it is just and reasonable for the court to exercise its discretion to grant the extension.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.3(1)
  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.5(1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Combined Properties Ltd v. HP GAUFF INGENIEURE GMBH & Co. & Ors (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1998) [2016] UGHCEBD 4 (29 April 2016)
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.