Wakilii

Kalungi and Another v Kaganda (Miscellaneous Application 860 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHCFD 88 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for substitution and addition of parties in pending civil suit arising from administration cause
Decision
Application dismissed for lack of credible evidence and abuse of court process

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

Application for substitution and addition of parties dismissed. Court held that applicants failed to prove the original plaintiff was outside the jurisdiction, and the application constituted an abuse of court process where the same plaintiff had filed a parallel suit on the same cause of action after the substitution application was filed.

Outcome

Application dismissed for lack of credible evidence and abuse of court process

Facts

The applicants sought to substitute and add themselves as plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 133 of 2020, which concerned the administration of the estate of the late Mugisa Lucky Patrick who died in April 2013. The original plaintiff, Kajumba Jackline, had filed the suit seeking to revoke the respondent's grant of administration. The applicants claimed the plaintiff had left Uganda for Dubai and would not return. The respondent opposed, arguing the application was an abuse of process. Evidence showed that after the substitution application was filed on 16 September 2022, the same plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 425 of 2022 on 31 October 2022 on the same cause of action, demonstrating she remained within the jurisdiction.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants should be substituted and added as plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 133 of 2020 on grounds that the original plaintiff has left the country.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Substitution of Parties — Burden of Proof — Plaintiff Outside Jurisdiction
An application to substitute a plaintiff on grounds that the plaintiff is outside the jurisdiction must be supported by credible evidence proving the plaintiff's absence from the jurisdiction and inability to continue the suit.
Civil Procedure — Abuse of Process — Parallel Proceedings — Same Cause of Action
Where an applicant seeks substitution on grounds that the original plaintiff is unavailable, but the same plaintiff subsequently files a parallel suit on the same cause of action, the substitution application constitutes an abuse of court process.
Civil Procedure — Substitution and Addition of Parties — Principles — Interest of Justice
Substitution of parties should only be allowed in the interest of justice to enable all questions in the matter to be settled and to avoid multiplicity of suits, and must not be made malafide or with intent to delay proceedings.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalungi and Another v Kaganda (Miscellaneous Application 860 of 2022) [2023] UGHCFD 88 (28 April 2023)
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.