Dr. Bwogi Kanyerezi v The Management Committee of Rubaga Girls' School (Civil Application No. 12 of 1999)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

The Court considered an application to strike out a notice of appeal for late service under rule 77(1) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal, which requires service within seven days of lodging. The notice was lodged on 20 February 1998, so service was due by 27 February 1998, but it was effected on 3 March 1998, outside the prescribed period. As no extension of time had been obtained, the Court held that service was out of time and the notice of appeal was struck out, with costs to the applicant.

Outcome

Application to strike out the notice of appeal granted; notice of appeal struck out for late service.

Facts

The notice of appeal was lodged in court on 20 February 1998. Under rule 77(1) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal, service of the notice was required within seven days, making the last date for service 27 February 1998. According to the affidavit in reply, service was in fact effected on 3 March 1998, outside the prescribed seven-day period. No extension of time for service had been sought or granted. The party against whom service should have been effected applied to strike out the notice of appeal and the appeal on the basis of the late service.

Issues

1. Whether the notice of appeal was served on the respondent within the time prescribed by rule 77(1) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal.

Orders

• The application succeeds.
• Costs awarded to the applicant/respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Rules of the Court of Appeal r.77(1)

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.

• Joseph Muluta v Sylvano Katama [1999] UGSC 4

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