Kurusumu & 2 Ors v Masereka & Anor (HCT – 01 – LD – CA 29 OF 2014)

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.

Holding

The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution under Order 9 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Neither the parties nor their advocates appeared on multiple scheduled hearing dates, constituting gross negligence and abuse of court process.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution without determination on merits

Facts

The respondents, as administrators of the estate of Masinda Stephen Kahekamahwa (deceased 2007), sued the appellants for trespass on three acres of customary land at Kyihalimu, Kasese District. The respondents claimed the deceased acquired eight acres in 1966 and the appellants trespassed in 2008. The appellants averred that the second appellant acquired the suit land in 1965 from a village elder. The trial magistrate found for the respondents and ordered eviction. The appellants appealed on multiple grounds including res judicata and limitation. Neither the parties nor their advocates appeared at multiple scheduled hearings in the appeal.

Issues

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-appearance of parties and advocates

Orders

• Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
• No order as to costs.

Legislation cited (1)

• Civil Procedure Rules Order 9 Rule 17

Cases cited (4)

• Pandya v Republic [1957] EA 336
• Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
• Agri-Industrial Management Agency Ltd v Nayaika Lee Kasunga (High Court Civil Suit No. 39 of 2003)
• Canster Rags (U) Ltd v Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd and Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 159 of 2012)

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