Wakilii

Mrs Kayanja and Others v Kiggundu (Civil Appeal No. 39 of 2018)

High Court · [2023] UGHCLD 36 · 2023 Appeal Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Chief Magistrate's Court judgment dismissing suit for trespass and declaratory orders
Decision
Appeal struck out for failure to properly certify the record of appeal

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 struck out the appeal with costs on the ground that the record of appeal from the lower court was not properly certified. The court held that under Order 43 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, it is the duty of the appellant to ensure proper certification of the lower court record before submission to the High Court. The uncertified supplementary record did not meet the requirements of secondary evidence under the Evidence Act.

Outcome

Appeal struck out for failure to properly certify the record of appeal

Facts

The appellants had instituted a suit in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Nabweru claiming they were rightful owners of a kibanja and seeking compensation of eight million shillings, a permanent injunction, and declaratory orders against the respondent for trespass. The respondent claimed he was the son of the late Mukasa Yekoyasi who owned the land and that he had been using it for agricultural purposes and caretaking on behalf of beneficiaries. The trial magistrate dismissed the suit with costs, finding that the plaintiffs had failed to prove their case. The appellants appealed to the High Court on four grounds challenging the trial magistrate's evaluation of evidence and conclusions. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appellants' supplementary record of appeal was not properly certified.

Issues

  1. Whether the supplementary record of appeal filed by the appellants was properly certified and admissible.
  2. Whether the record of appeal was properly certified for purposes of the appeal.

Orders

  • The entire appeal is struck out with costs.
  • The preliminary objection is upheld.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Record of Appeal — Certification Requirements
It is the duty of the appellant to ensure that the record of the lower court is properly certified before it is submitted to the High Court for appeal purposes, and failure to do so renders the appeal liable to be struck out.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Supplementary Record — Admissibility
A supplementary record of appeal that is not certified by the court from which it purports to originate is inadmissible as it does not fall within the definition of secondary evidence under section 62 of the Evidence Act.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Procedure — Notice to Lower Court
Under Order 43 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, when a memorandum of appeal is lodged, the High Court shall send notice of the appeal to the court from whose decree the appeal is preferred, and that court shall send all material papers with all practicable dispatch.

Legislation cited (5)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mrs_Kayanja_and_Others_v_Kiggundu_(Civil_Appeal_No._39_of_2018)_[2023]_UGHCLD_36_(20_February_2023)
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.