Kabazi v Kabazi (Civil Appeal 118 of 2023)
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
An appeal against an order dismissing a suit on a preliminary point of law, such as res judicata, does not lie as of right. Section 79 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 44 rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules do not include orders on preliminary objections among those appealable as of right. Leave must first be sought from the court making the order under Order 44 rules 2 and 3 before filing an appeal. Since the appellant failed to seek leave before instituting the appeal, the appeal was incompetent and struck out.
Outcome
Appeal struck out for failure to obtain leave of court before filing
Facts
The appellant, Aida Kabazi, one of the administrators of the estate of the late Isreal Kabazi, appealed against the decision of the Chief Magistrate's Court at Budaka dismissing Land Suit No. 07 of 2023 on grounds that it was res judicata with Civil Suit No. 01 of 2014 and Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2020. The trial magistrate found that both the dismissed suit and the prior proceedings concerned the same land, allegedly given to the plaintiff by her late husband Isreal Kabazi, and that both claims related to approximately 3 acres formerly owned by the late Isreal Kabazi. The appellant filed an appeal directly to the High Court without first seeking leave from the trial court.
Issues
- Whether an appeal lies as of right to the High Court from a ruling dismissing a suit on a preliminary point of law without first seeking leave of court.
- Whether the trial Chief Magistrate erred in holding that Land Suit No. 07 of 2023 was barred by res judicata.
Orders
- Appeal struck out.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (5)
- Akbar Hussein Godi v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 03 of 2013)
- Dr. Sheik Ahmed Mohammed Kisuule v Greenland Bank (in liquidation) (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2010)
- Emmanuel Tumusiime v Perusi Namagembe and Anor (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 2023)
- Baku Raphael Obudra and Anor v Attorney General (Supreme Court Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2005)
- Attorney General v Shah [1971] EA 50
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.