Hadijah Nansubuga and Another v Kabuye Sirajje (Miscellaneous Application No. 1400 of 2025)
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
The High Court dismissed the application under Order 9 rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules due to the non-appearance of the applicants and their advocates at the scheduled hearing, with no reason provided for their absence. Costs were awarded to the respondent.
Outcome
Application dismissed for non-appearance
Facts
The applicants filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1400 of 2025 arising from Civil Suit No. 285 of 2021. The application was scheduled for hearing on 3 September 2025. The respondent and their counsel attended. The applicants and their advocates failed to appear and provided no reason for their absence. Counsel for the respondent requested dismissal under Order 9 rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Issues
- Whether the application should be dismissed for non-appearance of the applicants and their advocates
Orders
- Application dismissed under Order 9 rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Legislation cited (1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.22
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.