Najjembe and Another v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application No. 1858 of 2022)
Observed later treatment
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 court dismissed the application for leave to substitute and add plaintiffs. The applicants, having transferred their interest in the suit land, sought to substitute themselves with new registered proprietors and add an administrator as plaintiffs. The court held that the intended plaintiffs, not being parties to the application and having not formally expressed interest in joining the suit, could not be compelled to take over prosecution of the head suit. The plaintiff is dominus litis and determines whom to sue; the court cannot bind parties who have not participated in proceedings or expressed interest in being joined.
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicants cannot substitute or add plaintiffs who have not themselves applied to be joined
Facts
The applicants were registered proprietors of land measuring 164.70 hectares which the Government of Uganda compulsorily acquired in 1972 without compensation. The applicants became registered proprietors on 30 October 2014 and instituted Civil Suit No. 477 of 2015 for compensation. On 19 December 2019, the court entered judgment on admission in favour of the applicants for UGX 1,570,963,242. On 28 October 2021, the applicants transferred their complete interest in the suit land to four family members of the late original proprietor, who became registered as new proprietors. The applicants then brought this application seeking leave to substitute themselves with the new proprietors and to add the administrator of the estate of the late original proprietor as plaintiffs. The court had previously directed on 25 October 2022 that the intending plaintiffs should file a formal application for addition as parties, but the current applicants brought the application instead.
Issues
- Whether the applicants, who had transferred their interest in the suit land to third parties, had standing to bring an application to substitute and add plaintiffs in the head suit.
- Whether the intended plaintiffs, who did not themselves bring the application, could be joined as parties without formally expressing interest to be so joined.
- Whether the proposed amendment would introduce a new cause of action prejudicial to the respondent after judgment on admission had been entered.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.31
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.13
- Civil Procedure Rules O.11 r.1(a)
- Civil Procedure Act s.64
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
- Judicature Act s.39
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.10(2)
- Judicature Act Cap.13 s.33
Cases cited (5)
- Departed Asians Property Custodian Board v Jaffer Brothers Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
- Gokaldas Laximidas Tanna v Store Rose Muyinza (HCCS No. 7076 of 1987)
- Kingori vs. Chege and others [2002] 2 KLR 243
- Kamau vs. Makomboki Tea Factory Ltd [2008] 1 EA 154
- Santana Fernandes vs. Kaala Arjan & Sons & 2 Ors [1961] EA 693
Cases citing this judgment (3)
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.
- Kenneth Tumwebaze Rwankungu v Kalema Sarah and Others (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4 of 2025)
- Nsasirwe Patience and Others v Kampala International University Teaching And Research Hospital (K.I.U-TH) and Another (Labour Dispute Claim No. LAB 168 of 2021)
- Nsasirwe Patience and Others v Kampala International University Teaching And Research Hospital (K.I.U-TH) and Another (Labour Dispute Claim No. LAB 168 of 2021; LABOUR DISPUTE REFE
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.