Wakilii

Iriama and Another v Otim and Others (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 156 of 2023)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 340 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application under the Slip Rule to correct judgment in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022
Decision
Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022 corrected to expressly uphold the judgment and orders of the lower court

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

Held that where an appeal is struck out and dismissed as incompetent, it is the court's manifest intention that the judgment and orders of the lower court remain undisturbed. The failure to expressly state that the lower court's judgment and orders are upheld constitutes an accidental omission curable under the Slip Rule in section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Outcome

Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022 corrected to expressly uphold the judgment and orders of the lower court

Facts

The applicants had been respondents in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022, which arose from Civil Suit No. 011 of 2020. On 20 September 2023, the High Court struck out and dismissed the appeal as incompetent on preliminary objections. The court ordered costs of the appeal to the respondents (present applicants) but did not expressly state that the judgment and orders of the lower court were upheld. The applicants brought this application under the Slip Rule to correct the judgment to include an order upholding the lower court's judgment and orders. The respondents opposed, arguing that section 99 did not apply and that there was no error requiring correction.

Issues

  1. Whether the judgment in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022 contained a clerical error or accidental slip or omission under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act in failing to uphold the judgment and orders of the lower court.
  2. Whether section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act applies to the instant application.

Orders

  • Application allowed under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.
  • The final orders in Civil Appeal No. 0066 of 2022 corrected to include: 'The judgement and orders of the lower court are accordingly upheld.'
  • No order as to costs of the application.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Slip Rule — Application of Section 99 Civil Procedure Act — Correction of Accidental Omissions
Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act permits the court to correct clerical or mathematical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders, or errors arising from any accidental slip or omission, either on its own motion or on application by any party. The applicant must prove that there was a clerical error or accidental slip or omission which did not give effect to the intention of the court when it passed the judgment.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Effect of Striking Out Appeal as Incompetent — Preservation of Lower Court Orders
Where an appeal is struck out and dismissed as incompetent, the manifest intention of the court is that the judgment and orders of the lower court remain undisturbed and are upheld. The failure to expressly state this in the final orders constitutes an accidental omission curable under the Slip Rule.
Civil Procedure — Slip Rule — Distinction from Appeal — Limits of Court's Inherent Jurisdiction
The court has inherent jurisdiction to recall its judgment to give effect to its manifest intention or what clearly would have been the intention of court had some matter not been inadvertently omitted, but the court will not sit on appeal in its own judgment in the same proceedings.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (1)

  • Uganda Development Bank Ltd v Oil Seeds (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 15 of 1997)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Iriama and Another v Otim and Others (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 156 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 340 (7 May 2024)
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.