Kereni Bwomono V Titus Kidega Lak & 2 Ors (High Court Civil Suit No. MG 5 94)
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 application for adjournment on grounds that the plaintiff was too busy at work and witnesses failed to appear without explanation does not constitute sufficient cause under O.15 r.1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court dismissed the application and the suit under O.9 r.19 with costs to the defendants.
Outcome
Suit dismissed for failure to proceed
Facts
The plaintiff sought an adjournment when the case was called for hearing on 26 April 1996 on grounds that he was unable to leave his employment in the President's Office where he was alone in the Communication Section due to his colleague's illness, and that other witnesses from Kitgum were also not present though notified. The 2nd defendant's counsel opposed the application, arguing that the plaintiff was asking the court to adjourn at his convenience without sufficient cause.
Issues
- Whether sufficient cause was shown to justify grant of adjournment.
Orders
- Application for adjournment dismissed.
- Suit dismissed under O.9 r.19 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Costs awarded to the 2nd and 3rd Defendants.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.15 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.19
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.