Wakilii

Mudaki and 2 Others v Kemigisa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 90 of 2021)

High Court · [2023] UGHCCD 49 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for substitution of party representatives arising from underlying land civil suit
Decision
Applicants substituted as plaintiff representatives to continue the underlying land suit

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 substitution of party representatives where two of the original three plaintiff representatives had died and the third was too ill to continue. The court held that substitution under Order 1 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules should be granted where it serves the interests of justice and enables full determination of the controversy without causing injustice to any party.

Outcome

Applicants substituted as plaintiff representatives to continue the underlying land suit

Facts

The applicants were among 97 people represented by three agents in Land Civil Suit No. 12 of 2013 concerning their interests as bonafide occupants on land comprised in Block 71 Mwenge, Plot 4, Land at Rugombe, Kyenjojo District. Two of the three original plaintiff representatives, Mutabazi Lawrence Kyamulesire and Kobwemi Antonio, had died. The third representative, Yolam B. Kagoro, was suffering from multiple illnesses and unable to testify or appear in court. The applicants sought to be substituted as plaintiff representatives to protect the interests of the group and enable the case to proceed to hearing and disposal. The other members of the group consented to the substitution. The application was unopposed by the respondents.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants should be granted an order to substitute the plaintiffs in Land Civil Suit No. 012 of 2013

Orders

  • The applicants are substituted as the plaintiffs in HCT-01-CV-CS-LD-012 of 2012 in a representative capacity.
  • Mutabazi Lawrence Kyamulesire, Kobwemi Antonio and Yolam B. Kagoro are struck out as plaintiffs.
  • The applicants shall file an amended plaint if any within 10 days from date of this ruling reflecting this change and have the same served upon the respondents.
  • HCT-01-CV-CS-LD-012 of 2012 is fixed for mention and further directions on 22 February 2023.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Parties — Substitution — Principles Governing Substitution Applications
The power to add, remove or substitute a party under Order 1 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules is wide and extensive with no limitation curtailing or restricting the court's discretion, provided the order does not cause injustice to any party and is geared towards ensuring that all questions in controversy are heard and determined to finality.
Civil Procedure — Parties — Substitution — Grounds for Granting Substitution
Substitution should not be granted as a matter of course but must be premised on the relevancy of the party to enable the case to be fully investigated and determined, and should not be made malafide or with inordinate delay intended to obstruct the hearing of the case.
Civil Procedure — Parties — Substitution — Death or Incapacity of Representative Party
Where original plaintiff representatives have died or become incapacitated through illness and unable to continue proceedings, the court may substitute new representatives from among the group they represent to enable the case to proceed to hearing and disposal in the interests of justice.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mudaki and 2 Others v Kemigisa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 90 of 2021) [2023] UGHCCD 49 (6 March 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.