Mukabihebwoha Geofrey v Nalubowa Harriet [2026] UGHCLD 259
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 appeal, fixed for hearing on the reflected ECCMIS date, was called with neither party present and no reason given for their absence. The High Court (Land Division) dismissed the appeal under Order 9 rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-attendance. No substantive question of law was determined.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for non-attendance of the parties.
Facts
The matter was a civil appeal fixed for hearing on 23 June 2026, with the date reflected on the ECCMIS system. When the appeal was called, neither the appellant nor the respondent was present, and no reason was given for their non-attendance.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed under Order 9 rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Legislation cited (1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.17
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.