Joswa Mukalazi and Another v Yvonne Properties Ltd and Odoy Job Henry (Miscellaneous Application 2190 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 court held that an application for leave to appeal out of time is premature where the underlying order is not appealable as of right under Order 44 Rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The applicants must first obtain leave to appeal the order itself before seeking leave to file such appeal out of time. The application was dismissed as premature.
Outcome
Application dismissed as premature
Facts
The applicants were sued by the respondents for recovery of money under summary procedure in Civil Suit No. 221 of 2018. The applicants filed an application for leave to appear and defend the suit, which was dismissed, and judgment was entered in favour of the respondents. The applicants then filed an application for review, which was also dismissed. The applicants subsequently brought this application seeking leave to appeal out of time against the order dismissing their application for leave to appear and defend.
Issues
- Whether the applicants can seek leave to file an appeal out of time before being granted leave to file an appeal against the order of court.
Orders
- Application dismissed as premature.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (2)
- Attorney General v Shah [1971] EA 50
- Ntambara John v Rukiga SACCO (Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2022)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.