Wakilii

Makumbi Isa and Others v Mbabazi Ruth and 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application No.1229 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 228 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for extension of time to appeal an Assistant Registrar's ruling in an interlocutory application arising from a civil suit
Decision
Extension of time granted to file appeal against Assistant Registrar's ruling

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 granted the application for extension of time to appeal an Assistant Registrar's ruling, finding that although the applicants did not fully explain the delay between receiving the ruling on 3rd May 2025 and filing the application on 27th May 2025, the delay was not grave and the issues in the intended appeal required judicial consideration. Costs were awarded to be in the cause.

Outcome

Extension of time granted to file appeal against Assistant Registrar's ruling

Facts

The respondents filed Miscellaneous Application No. 3408 of 2024 seeking a temporary injunction to restrain the applicants from collecting rent or dealing with suit property. The applicants filed Miscellaneous Application No. 578 of 2025 seeking leave to file supplementary affidavits and requesting a locus visit. On 15th April 2025, the Assistant Registrar ruled in favour of the respondents in Miscellaneous Application No. 3408 of 2024 without first hearing Miscellaneous Application No. 578 of 2025. The applicants claimed they received the ruling on their ECCMIS account on 3rd May 2025, outside the seven-day appeal period prescribed by section 79(1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act. The applicants filed this application on 27th May 2025 seeking extension of time to appeal. The respondents opposed, arguing the ruling was uploaded on 17th April 2025, that the applicants delayed three weeks after learning of it, and that the applicants had already taken out Summons for Directions indicating they considered interlocutory matters settled.

Issues

  1. Whether there is sufficient cause for extension of time within which to file the appeal

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Extension of time granted for the applicants to appeal the orders of the Assistant Registrar in Miscellaneous Application No. 3408 of 2024 out of time.
  • Costs to be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Discretion of Court — Sufficient Cause
Where an application for extension of time to appeal is made, the court must carefully scrutinize the evidence to determine whether it presents proper grounds justifying the grant of enlargement, and will only grant the application if the evidence makes it absolutely plain that the applicant is entitled to leave, as such an order may deprive the respondent of a valuable right to finality of litigation.
Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Delay Not Grave — Issues Requiring Judicial Consideration
In exercising discretion to grant extension of time to appeal, the court may allow the application where the delay is not grave and the issues in the intended appeal require judicial consideration, even where the applicant has not fully explained all aspects of the delay.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (1)

  • Muzamil Ayile v Rose Tarapke and 6 Others (Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 0024 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makumbi_Isa_and_Others_v_Mbabazi_Ruth_and_3_Others_(Miscellaneous_Application_No.1229_of_2025)_[2025]_UGHCLD_228_(29_August_2025)
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.