Wakilii

Nalwadda Hanifa and Another v Sarah Nakibuuka Kimera [2026] UGHCFD 65

High Court · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal by notice of motion to a judge of the High Court against a ruling of the Deputy Registrar in a contempt application arising from a consent judgment
Decision
Registrar's ruling set aside as ultra vires; parties directed to pursue the pending Miscellaneous Application No. 1364 of 2025 seeking to set aside the consent judgment to its logical conclusion

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 (Family Division) held that a Registrar exercises only delegated authority conferred by statute or rules and has no inherent jurisdiction; setting aside a consent judgment is a substantive judicial function reserved to a judge of the High Court. A consent judgment is both a contract and a judgment and may be interfered with only on grounds that would vitiate a contract, such as fraud, mistake, misrepresentation or illegality, and then by way of review under section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 rule 1. The Registrar's ruling nullifying the consent judgment in Civil Suit No. 268 of 2022 was ultra vires, null and void ab initio, and was set aside with costs.

Outcome

Registrar's ruling set aside as ultra vires; parties directed to pursue the pending Miscellaneous Application No. 1364 of 2025 seeking to set aside the consent judgment to its logical conclusion

Facts

The late Salim Galibawo Kimera died on 13 April 2022. Civil Suit No. 268 of 2022 concerning contentious estate properties was compromised by a consent settlement endorsed by a Deputy Registrar on 7 February 2023. The consent purported to grant letters of administration of the estate to the respondent widow, Sarah Nakibuuka Kimera, and to the applicants, the deceased's daughter and son. The applicants later filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1533 of 2024 seeking to hold the respondent in contempt of the consent. The respondent contended that the suit had been filed without her instructions and that she signed the consent under mistake or misrepresentation, and that its validity was already before the court in Miscellaneous Application No. 1364 of 2025. On 16 October 2025 the Deputy Registrar, before deciding contempt, considered the validity of the consent, held it invalid because a grant of letters of administration can only be made by a judge, set the consent judgment aside and dismissed the contempt application. The applicants appealed to a judge of the High Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned Registrar exercised jurisdiction not vested in her by setting aside a consent judgment of the High Court, that power being reserved to a judge.
  2. Whether the Registrar misdirected herself on the law governing the setting aside of consent judgments.
  3. Whether the Registrar erred in determining a ground not raised by the parties without affording them a hearing.
  4. Whether the Registrar erred in dismissing the contempt application (MA No. 1533 of 2024) while an application to set aside the consent (MA No. 1364 of 2025) remained pending.

Orders

  • The ruling and orders of the learned Registrar, HW Tusiime Sarah Birungi, delivered on 16th October 2025 in Miscellaneous Application No. 1533 of 2024 are hereby set aside.
  • Costs of this application are awarded to the applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Registrars — Limits of Delegated Judicial Authority — No Inherent Jurisdiction
A registrar exercises only such judicial authority as is expressly conferred by statute or rules of procedure; a registrar possesses no inherent jurisdiction and cannot assume powers reserved to a judge of the High Court, and any decision made in excess of that authority is ultra vires and void.
Civil Procedure — Consent Judgments — Grounds and Forum for Setting Aside
A consent judgment is both a contract between the parties and a judgment of the court, and may be set aside only on grounds that would justify setting aside a contract, such as fraud, mistake, misrepresentation or illegality; the power to set it aside is exercisable by a judge of competent jurisdiction and not by a registrar unless expressly provided by law.
Civil Procedure — Review — Section 82 Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 rule 1 — Proper Remedy Where Error Apparent on the Record
Where a consent order was entered before and endorsed by a registrar, the registrar's competence is confined to reviewing that order under section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules for mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or on discovery of new and important evidence; it does not extend to nullifying the order on grounds not raised in the application before her.
Succession & Estates — Letters of Administration — Grant a Preserve of a Judge of the High Court
A grant of letters of administration of a deceased person's estate can only be made by a judge of the High Court and cannot be conferred by a consent settlement endorsed by a registrar, but the invalidity of such a term does not empower the registrar to set aside the consent judgment itself.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings and Applications — Citation of Wrong Enabling Provision
Citing a wrong enabling provision does not render an application incompetent where the court has jurisdiction and the substance of the application is clear.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (3)

  • Hirani v Kassam (1952) 19 EACA 131
  • Ladak Abdulla Muhammad Hussein v Griffiths Isingoma Kakiiza and 2 Others (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1995)
  • Makula International Ltd v His Eminence Cardinal Nsubuga and Another [1982] HCB 11

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nalwadda Hanifa and Another v Sarah Nakibuuka Kimera [2026] UGHCFD 65 (20 May 2026)
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.