Kuteesa Nicholas v Uganda (HCT-00-AC-CN-0016-2025)
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
The court held that where an appeal has been dismissed for want of prosecution, the proper procedure requires the appellant to apply for reinstatement of the dismissed appeal rather than filing a new memorandum of appeal. The appellant must demonstrate sufficient cause for restoration. The new memorandum was struck out as incompetent.
Outcome
Memorandum of appeal struck out as incompetent
Facts
The appellant filed a Memorandum of Appeal in this matter. Previously, Appeal No. 10 of 2025 had been filed. On 11 September 2025, the court dismissed that appeal for want of prosecution. Following this dismissal, the appellant filed the current Memorandum of Appeal instead of applying for reinstatement of the dismissed appeal.
Issues
- Whether the filing of a new memorandum of appeal is competent after a previous appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Orders
- The memorandum of appeal is incompetent and is struck out.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Criminal Procedure Code Act
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 66(5)
- Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions S.I. 13-11 Rule 62(5)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.