Elimu v Akello (Miscellaneous Application No. 153 of 2022)
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.
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 held that sufficient cause was shown for the applicant's non-appearance at the hearing of the dismissed appeal. COVID-19 restrictions during the relevant period, absence of evidence that the applicant was notified of the final hearing date, and non-receipt of the lower court record constituted sufficient cause under Order 43 Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The appeal was readmitted in the interest of justice, particularly given that it concerned a land matter requiring determination on merit.
Outcome
Appeal readmitted for hearing on merits; applicant directed to fix appeal within two months or face dismissal with costs
Facts
The applicant filed Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2021 on 9 February 2021 arising from a land dispute decided by Soroti Chief Magistrate's Court in Civil Suit No. 038 of 2017. The appeal was fixed for hearing on 28 April 2021 and 1 July 2021, but neither party appeared. On 17 September 2021, only the respondent appeared. The matter was adjourned to 20 September 2021. On that date, only the respondent appeared and the appeal was dismissed for the applicant's non-appearance. The applicant then filed this application in November 2022 seeking to set aside the dismissal order. The applicant claimed he was not notified of hearing dates due to COVID-19 disruptions and had not received the lower court record. The respondent opposed, arguing inordinate delay and that COVID-19 restrictions had been lifted by the time of dismissal.
Issues
- Whether there are any justifiable grounds to merit setting aside the order dismissing HCCA No. 02 of 2021?
- What are the remedies available to the parties in the circumstances?
Orders
- The order dismissing H.C.C.A No. 02 of 2021 is set aside.
- Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2021 is re-admitted.
- The costs of this application is awarded to the respondent.
- The applicant is directed to fix the impugned appeal for hearing and determination on own merits within Two (2) months from the date hereof and any failure to do so would render the appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 43 Rule 3
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 43 Rule 14
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 43 Rule 16
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rules 1, 2, and 3
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 28(1)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 28(2)
- Judicature Act s.33
Cases cited (7)
- Abel Belemesa v Yesero Mugenyi (HCMA No. 126 of 2019)
- Attorney General v Gladys Nakibuule Kisseka (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 2016)
- Musini v Wabwiso [1976] HCB 349
- Isadru v Aroma & Ors (HCCA No. 0033 of 2014)
- Solland International Ltd v. Clifford Harris & Co [2015] EWHC 2018
- Phelps v. Button [2016] EWHC 3185
- Ephraim Ongom v Francis Benega (SCCA No. 10 of 1987)
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
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.