Wakilii

Mineral Access System Ltd v Simon Tendo Kabenge Advocates (HCT-00-CC-MA 719 of 2014)

High Court · [2014] UGCOMMC 169 · 2014 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to review an earlier ruling striking out the applicant's Written Statement of Defence for non-payment of court fees
Decision
Application dismissed with costs

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 to review a ruling striking out a Written Statement of Defence for non-payment of court fees was dismissed where the earlier order directing payment of fees had not been appealed or reviewed and remained standing, such that reviewing the later order would not undo the defiance of the earlier direction.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs

Facts

The applicant filed a Written Statement of Defence with a counterclaim in Civil Suit No. 275 of 2011. Justice Kiryabwire found that the applicant had not properly paid court fees for the counterclaim, having reused a receipt from another pleading, but ordered the applicant to pay all relevant fees before the main suit hearing. When the suit came up for hearing, the applicant failed to show that fees had been paid as directed. The court (Wangutusi J) struck out the Written Statement of Defence and entered judgment, setting the matter down for formal proof. The applicant then sought to review this ruling, arguing there was an error apparent on the record regarding payment of fees and claiming fees had been paid on 13 September 2011.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should review its ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 570 of 2011 on grounds of error apparent on the face of the record regarding court fees paid.
  2. Whether a review of one judge's order can be granted where it would not undo an earlier undisturbed order of another judge.

Orders

  • Application for review dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Review — Scope and Limitations
An application to review a ruling under Order 46 Rule 2 must be made to the judge who passed the decree or made the order sought to be reviewed.
Civil Procedure — Review — Effect of Earlier Undisturbed Orders
Where an earlier court order directing payment of fees has not been appealed or reviewed and remains standing, a review of a subsequent order striking out pleadings for non-compliance with the earlier order will not grant relief where the applicant has not sought leave to pay fees beyond the dates specified in the earlier order.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Githere v Kimungu (1976)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mineral Access System Ltd v Simon Tendo Kabenge Advocates (HCT-00-CC-MA 719 of 2014) [2014] UGCommC 169 (11 December 2014)
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.