Wakilii

Mayaye Saad v Lutaaya Tukirambudde and Another (Civil Suit No. 688 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHCLD 149 · 2026 Suit Abated AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit in the Land Division dismissed for procedural non-compliance
Decision
Suit abated due to Plaintiff's procedural non-compliance

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 High Court held that the suit abated under Order 11A Rule 1(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules because the Plaintiff failed to take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of filing of the 1st Defendant's written statement of defence, as required by Order 11A Rule 1(2). The mandatory nature of this provision meant non-compliance resulted in automatic abatement.

Outcome

Suit abated due to Plaintiff's procedural non-compliance

Facts

The Plaintiff filed a civil suit in the Land Division on 13 October 2025. Summons to file a defence were issued on 24 October 2025. The 1st Defendant filed a written statement of defence on 12 December 2025. There was no evidence that the 2nd Defendant was served with summons to file a defence. The Plaintiff failed to take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of filing of the 1st Defendant's defence, as required by Order 11A Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court found that this mandatory provision had not been complied with.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit abated due to the Plaintiff's failure to take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of filing of the written statement of defence.

Orders

  • The suit abated under Order 11A Rule 1(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules due to failure by the Plaintiff to take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of filing of the written statement of defence.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summons for Directions — Mandatory Time Limit — Consequence of Non-Compliance
Where a suit has been instituted by way of plaint, the Plaintiff must take out summons for directions within 28 days from the date of the last reply or rejoinder, and failure to comply with this mandatory provision under Order 11A Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules results in automatic abatement of the suit under Order 11A Rule 1(6).

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mayaye_Saad_v_Lutaaya_Tukirambudde_and_Another_(Civil_Suit_No._688_of_2025)_[2026]_UGHCLD_149_(22_April_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.