Wakilii

Dooba Enterprises v Nansubuga Rebecca and Others [2026] UGHCLD 21

High Court · 2026 Suit Dismissed for Want of Prosecution AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Court's own motion ruling dismissing a first instance land suit for want of prosecution
Decision
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs

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

Where no application is made or step taken by either party with a view to proceeding with a suit for a period of two years, the court may dismiss the suit under Order 17 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, exercising also its inherent power under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to prevent abuse of process. The last step on the file was the plaintiff's trial bundle filed on 25 February 2022, with no follow-up by either party thereafter. A plaintiff pursuing a remedy must take all necessary steps to secure expeditious determination of the claim. The suit was accordingly dismissed for non-action, with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs

Facts

The plaintiff filed a plaint on 15 April 2019 seeking cancellation of the certificates of title for Kyadondo Block 234, plots 6300 to 6305, land at Kilinya, Bweyogerere, Kira Municipality, Wakiso District; a declaration that it is the legal owner of the suit land; a declaration that the 2nd defendant is a trespasser; and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further trespass and illegal dealings on the suit land. The last step taken on the court file was the filing of a trial bundle by the plaintiff on 25 February 2022. Thereafter neither party took any step or made any application with a view to proceeding with the suit. The court, on considering the inactivity of over two years, moved to dispose of the file.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be dismissed where no application was made or step taken by either party with a view to proceeding with the suit for over two years.

Orders

  • The case is dismissed under Order 17 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 and section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 for non-action by the parties for over two years.
  • There is no order for costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Want of Prosecution — Dismissal Under Order 17 Rule 6(1) After Two Years of Inaction
Where, in a case not otherwise provided for, no application is made or step taken by either party with a view to proceeding with the suit for a period of two years, the court may order the suit dismissed under Order 17 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Jurisdiction — Section 98 Civil Procedure Act as Basis for Disposing of Dormant Files
The court retains inherent power under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to make such orders as are necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process, which may be invoked alongside Order 17 rule 6(1) to dismiss a dormant suit.
Civil Procedure — Duty of Plaintiff — Diligence in Prosecuting a Claim
A plaintiff in pursuit of a remedy must take all necessary steps at his disposal to achieve an expeditious determination of the claim, and failure to do so exposes the suit to dismissal.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Nilani Vs. Patel & others (1969) EA 340

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Dooba Enterprises v Nansubuga Rebecca and Others [2026] UGHCLD 21 (28 January 2026)
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.