Wakilii

Dombo v Bigirwenkya and Another (Miscellaneous Application 160 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHC 93 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to dismiss a civil appeal arising from Chief Magistrate's Court decision, withdrawn by applicant after respondent produced proof of compliance with court order
Decision
Application withdrawn by applicant and dismissed by court; substantive Civil Appeal No. 0043 of 2021 to proceed

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 granted the applicant leave to withdraw the application under Order 25 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules after the respondents produced evidence that security for due performance amounting to UGX 5,000,000 had been deposited within the court-ordered timelines. The application was dismissed with no orders as to costs.

Outcome

Application withdrawn by applicant and dismissed by court; substantive Civil Appeal No. 0043 of 2021 to proceed

Facts

The applicant filed a miscellaneous application seeking dismissal of Civil Appeal No. 0043 of 2021 on grounds that the respondents had not deposited security for due performance of UGX 5,000,000 as ordered by the Chief Magistrate on 12 December 2021, with a deadline of 25 March 2022. When the matter came up for hearing on 13 March 2023, applicant's counsel stated that the respondents had filed a reply containing proof of payment. The respondent produced a general receipt and acknowledgement from the cashier of Masindi Chief Magistrates Court dated 25 March 2022 showing payment of the security, as well as a bank statement from Stanbic Bank showing an EFT of UGX 5,000,000 to the Registrar High Court on 5 April 2023. Applicant's counsel then made an oral application to withdraw the application under Order 25 rule 1 with no orders as to costs.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to withdraw the application under Order 25 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
  2. Whether proof of deposit of security for due performance had been established by the respondents

Orders

  • Application dismissed with no orders as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Withdrawal of Application — Exercise of Court's Discretion under Order 25 Rule 1(2)
Where an applicant seeks to withdraw an application orally and the issue forming the basis of the application has been overtaken by events, the court may exercise its discretion under Order 25 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules to grant leave to discontinue the application before or at or after hearing upon such terms as to costs as may be just.
Civil Procedure — Security for Due Performance — Proof of Compliance
Where a court has ordered deposit of security for due performance and the party produces documentary evidence including a general receipt from the judiciary and acknowledgement from the court cashier showing payment within the court-ordered timeline, such evidence establishes compliance with the court order.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Dombo v Bigirwenkya and Another (Miscellaneous Application 160 of 2022) [2023] UGHC 93 (27 October 2023)
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.