Wakilii

Nalubowa v Nasazi (Miscellaneous Application 162 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 288 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal out of time and validation of memorandum of appeal arising from Chief Magistrate's Court judgment
Decision
Application allowed; memorandum of appeal validated; appeal to proceed on merits

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 held that the memorandum of appeal filed on 2 July 2024 was filed in time because the time for lodgment of an appeal does not begin to run until the appellant receives a copy of the proceedings. The certified record of proceedings was forwarded to the Deputy Registrar on 13 August 2024, after the memorandum had been filed. The application for leave to appeal out of time was therefore unnecessary. The court validated the memorandum of appeal and allowed the appeal to proceed on its merits, with each party bearing its own costs.

Outcome

Application allowed; memorandum of appeal validated; appeal to proceed on merits

Facts

The applicant sought leave to appeal out of time against a Chief Magistrate's Court judgment delivered on 7 June 2023 in Civil Suit No. 16 of 2019, a land dispute. The applicant filed a memorandum of appeal on 2 July 2024. She stated that the delay was caused by the trial court's delay in furnishing her with a certified copy of the record of proceedings and her lack of legal representation. The respondent objected, arguing that the application was served out of time and that the applicant had not provided sufficient justification for the delay. The respondent had already filed a bill of costs, and the applicant had appeared at taxation hearings with different lawyers. The certified record of proceedings was forwarded to the Deputy Registrar on 13 August 2024, after the memorandum of appeal had been filed.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has sufficient grounds to warrant grant of leave to appeal the decree in Civil Suit No. 16 of 2019 out of time.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The application is allowed.
  • The memorandum of appeal filed in this matter is valid and the appeal will be heard on its merits.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Commencement of Time for Appeal
The time for lodgment of an appeal does not begin to run until the appellant receives a copy of the proceedings against which he or she intends to appeal.
Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Extension of Time — Court's Inherent Powers
Where the court itself causes delay in endorsing a notice of motion, the court may invoke its inherent powers under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act and section 37 of the Judicature Act to validate service out of time and proceed to determine the application on its merits.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Points of Law — Affidavit Evidence
A preliminary objection based on a point of law requires no affidavit averment and may be raised orally.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (3)

  • Najuma Jesca and 6 Others v Moses Goloba and Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 770 of 2019)
  • Bitamisi Namuddu v Rwabuganda Godfrey (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2014)
  • Godfrey Tuwangye Kazzora v Georgina Katarikwenda [1992-93] HCB 145

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nalubowa v Nasazi (Miscellaneous Application 162 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 288 (9 April 2025)
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.