Nabweteme Margret Nalong and 7 Others v Evangelical Truth Ministries International Church [2026] UGHCLD 113
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 applicants sought dismissal of the head suit for the respondent's alleged failure to file an amended plaint within time and to produce evidence. The court record on ECCMIS showed the amended plaint had in fact been filed eleven days before the application was lodged, and the head suit had progressed with fresh directions. Applicants' counsel sought to withdraw the application. The court held that the application had been overtaken by events and, on the applicants' withdrawal, discontinued it and struck it off the record under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 25 rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. No order as to costs.
Outcome
Application withdrawn by applicants' counsel, discontinued and struck off the court record; head suit HCCS No. 211 of 2020 continues
Facts
The applicants, defendants in HCCS No. 211 of 2020 in the Land Division, brought an interlocutory application seeking dismissal of the head suit with costs. Their grounds, supported by the affidavit of an advocate from the firm formerly representing them, were that the respondent had been granted leave to amend its plaint on 2 March 2023 but had failed to file the amended plaint within the prescribed time and had failed to produce evidence or cause the attendance of its witnesses. The electronic court record on ECCMIS showed that the respondent had in fact filed the amended plaint on 20 March 2023, eleven days before the applicants filed the present application, and that the head suit had since progressed with further directions issued by court. At the hearing, counsel for the applicants indicated that they wished to withdraw the application.
Issues
- Whether the head suit should be dismissed for the respondent's alleged failure to comply with court directions to file an amended plaint and adduce evidence.
- What order the court should make where the applicants' counsel seeks to withdraw the application and the application has been overtaken by subsequent court directions.
Orders
- The application is discontinued and struck off the Court's record.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.