Nassimbwa v Kibiikyo and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 295 of 2023)
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 court set aside the dismissal order and reinstated Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2022. The applicant showed plausible cause for non-appearance, having mistakenly waited before a different judicial officer. The application was competently instituted by the sole remaining administrator after the co-administrator withdrew from the suit. The reinstated application seeks amendment of the plaint on different grounds from a subsequent application, justifying separate determination.
Outcome
Application granted. Dismissal order set aside and miscellaneous application reinstated for hearing on merits.
Facts
Nassimbwa Rose, as administrator of the estate of the late Mato Nuwa Salongo, filed MA. 816 of 2022 seeking amendment of the plaint in Civil Suit No. 226 of 2022. The application was fixed for hearing on 13 March 2023 at 5:00pm before Justice Keitirima. The applicant and beneficiaries mistakenly waited before HW Katushabe Prossy, where a previous application (MA. 900 of 2023) had been heard, believing that judicial officer would hear MA. 816 of 2022. By the time counsel appeared before Justice Keitirima at approximately 12:10pm, the matter had been called and dismissed in the absence of all parties. The applicant filed this application to set aside the dismissal order. The respondents contended the application was incompetent because it was instituted by only one administrator when there were two. The other administrator, Nababi Jane, had filed a notice of withdrawal from the main suit on 21 September 2022.
Issues
- Whether the dismissal order of MA. 816 of 2022 should be set aside.
- Whether MA. No. 816 of 2022 should be re-instated.
- Whether costs should be in the cause.
Orders
- The dismissal order of MA. 816 of 2022 be and is hereby set aside.
- MA. 816 of 2022 is hereby re-instated.
- Costs be in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.