Wakilii

James Rwanyarare & 5 Ors v Mr. Peter Wakidi Walubiri & 2 Ors (Civil Suit No. 464 of 2005) (Civil Suit No. 464 of 2005)

High Court · [2005] UGHC 60 · 2005 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal an interlocutory ruling and for stay of proceedings
Decision
Application dismissed; proceedings to continue

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 court held that leave to appeal an interlocutory ruling should not be granted where the appeal would cause delay without materially advancing the ultimate determination of the case. Following Supreme Court precedent in Sanyu Lwanga Musoke v Sam Galiwango, the proper practice is to allow the trial court to determine all interlocutory and substantive matters to finality, with appeal thereafter on all grounds together. The application for leave to appeal and for stay of proceedings was refused.

Outcome

Application dismissed; proceedings to continue

Facts

On 23 November 2005 the parties entered into a consent order recorded by the court. On 14 December 2005 the court ruled that the consent order was not a final judgment and that since the parties gave differing accounts of compliance with the consent order, the court would proceed to hear evidence to determine whether it had been complied with. The defendants applied for leave to appeal that interlocutory ruling and for a stay of proceedings pending appeal. The plaintiffs opposed the application.

Issues

  1. Whether leave to appeal should be granted against an interlocutory ruling.
  2. Whether proceedings should be stayed pending appeal.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused.
  • Application for stay of proceedings refused.
  • Hearing of the case on the stated issue to proceed.

Rules and key headnotes

Appeals — Interlocutory Orders — Leave to Appeal
An appeal against an interlocutory ruling made in the course of trial is generally not necessary because such matters can more conveniently be considered in an appeal from the final decision, thereby avoiding a multiplicity of appeals upon incidental orders.
Appeals — Interlocutory Orders — Grant of Leave
Leave to appeal an interlocutory order may be granted where the order involves a controlling question of law which on being resolved determines the whole case, or where an immediate appeal will materially advance the ultimate determination of the litigation.
Appeals — Interlocutory Orders — Refusal of Leave
Leave to appeal an interlocutory order will be refused where the intended appeal would result in abuse of court process by causing inordinate delay in the finalisation of the case without materially advancing its ultimate determination.

Cases cited (6)

  • Sanyu Lwanga Musoke v Sam Galiwango (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 48 of 1995)
  • Hannington Wasswa and Others v Maria Ochola and Others (Court of Appeal No. 5 of 1995)
  • Noble Builders (U) Ltd v SIETCO (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 31 of 1995)
  • Gurdial Singh and Dahilous V. Shaun Kaur: [1960] EA 795
  • Charles Harry Twagira v Director of Public Prosecutions (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 40 of 2005)
  • In re Bertoli, 812 F. 2d 136, 139 (3rd Civ. 1987)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

James Rwanyarare & 5 Ors v Mr. Peter Wakidi Walubiri & 2 Ors (Civil Suit No. 464 of 2005) (Civil Suit No. 464 of 2005) [2005] UGHC 60 (21 December 2005)
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.