Nova Rebecca and Another v Aidat Negesa and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 163 of 2025)
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 High Court lacks jurisdiction to review orders made by the Deputy Registrar. Order 50 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that the only remedy available to a party aggrieved by a registrar's order is an appeal by motion on notice. Order 46 rule 2 permits only a judge to review their own decisions, not those of a Deputy Registrar. Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Facts
The applicants instituted Civil Suit No. 24 of 2023 claiming ownership of property comprised in plot 22B Kumi Road Mbale City as part of the estate of the late Gudoi Edith. The applicants filed Miscellaneous Application No. 199 of 2024 seeking an interim injunction. The respondents filed Miscellaneous Application No. 188 of 2024 seeking security for costs and an order that the applicants deposit rent pending disposal of the main suit. The Deputy Registrar consolidated both applications and ordered that the respondents be restrained from evicting the applicants on condition that the applicants deposit rent of one million shillings per month from the time of filing the suit until its disposal. Dissatisfied with this order, the applicants filed the present application seeking review of the Deputy Registrar's order under Order 46 rules 1, 2 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Issues
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review an order made by the Deputy Registrar.
- Whether the proper remedy for a party dissatisfied with a Deputy Registrar's order is review or appeal.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondents.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.82
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 46 rule 1
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 46 rule 2
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 46 rule 4
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 50 rule 8
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 52 rule 1
- Civil Procedure Rules SI.71-1 Order 52 rule 3
Cases cited (1)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
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.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.