Wakilii

Kasule Ronald and Namajji Connie v Baguma Wilfred and Nampewo Violet [2026] UGHCLD 25

High Court · 2026 Suit Dismissed for Want of Prosecution AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Court's own motion ruling dismissing a first instance land suit for want of prosecution
Decision
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs

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

Where parties took no step in a land suit after filing trial bundles and witness statements in 2022, the court dismissed the suit under Order 17 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act for non-action for over two years. A plaintiff pursuing a remedy must take all necessary steps available to secure expeditious determination of the claim; prolonged inactivity entitles the court to dismiss the suit in the interests of justice and to prevent abuse of process. No order as to costs was made.

Outcome

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs

Facts

The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking declaratory and consequential orders in respect of land comprised in Bulemezi, Block 107, Plot 88 (mutated from Plot 51) at Bagya, Luweero District, together with general and aggravated damages for fraud and trespass, interest and costs. The last step taken by the parties in the proceedings was in 2022, when they filed their respective trial bundles and witness statements. Thereafter neither party took any step or made any application with a view to proceeding with the suit, and the matter remained dormant for more than two years until the court considered it in January 2026.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be dismissed where no application has been made or step taken by either party with a view to proceeding with the suit for a period exceeding two years.

Orders

  • The case is dismissed under Order 17, Rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 and Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 for non action by the parties for over two years.
  • There is no order for costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Dismissal for Want of Prosecution — Order 17 rule 6(1) Civil Procedure Rules
Where no application is made or step taken by either party with a view to proceeding with a suit for a period of two years, the court may order the suit dismissed under Order 17 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Duty of Diligence on Plaintiff — Inherent Power of Court under section 98 Civil Procedure Act
A plaintiff in pursuit of a remedy must take all necessary steps at his disposal to achieve an expeditious determination of the claim, and the court may invoke its inherent power under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to dismiss a dormant suit in the interests of justice and to prevent abuse of process.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Nilani Vs. Patel & others (1969) EA 340

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kasule Ronald and Namajji Connie v Baguma Wilfred and Nampewo Violet [2026] UGHCLD 25 (28 January 2026)
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.