Wakilii

Ntambara v Segawole (Miscellaneous Application No. 1082 of 2019)

High Court · [2020] UGCOMMC 5 · 2020 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Miscellaneous application to set aside ex parte judgment and order allowing hearing to proceed in absence of applicant, arising from Civil Suit No. 454 of 2004
Decision
Matter adjourned for one final opportunity for applicant to prosecute application

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

Where an applicant and counsel fail to appear on a hearing date without explanation, the court has discretion under Order 17 rule 4 to proceed immediately or dismiss. However, where the matter comes before the judge for the first time and in the interests of justice, the court may grant one final adjournment to allow the applicant to prosecute the application, with costs awarded against the defaulting party.

Outcome

Matter adjourned for one final opportunity for applicant to prosecute application

Facts

The applicant sought to set aside an ex parte judgment and order allowing hearing to proceed in his absence in Civil Suit No. 454 of 2004. On 15 January 2020, both parties and counsel appeared before the Deputy Registrar who adjourned the matter to 5 February 2020 for mention and ordered maintenance of status quo regarding suit land. On 5 February 2020, the matter came for hearing but neither the applicant nor his counsel appeared. Respondent's counsel moved for dismissal under Order 9 rule 22 and Order 17 rule 4. The court record showed a pattern of the applicant's non-attendance dating back to the head suit proceedings in 2007, when ex parte judgment was entered against him on 30 August 2007 after his repeated failure to appear despite service and generous adjournments.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should dismiss the application under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules where the applicant and counsel fail to appear on the hearing date with no reason given.

Orders

  • One final adjournment is allowed in this matter for the applicant and or his counsel to appear in court to prosecute this application.
  • This matter shall come for hearing on the 17th day of February, 2020 at 9.00 am.
  • The costs of today the 7th and that of 5th February, 2020 is awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Order 17 rule 4 — Court's discretion where party fails to appear
Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules vests a judicial officer with discretion and power to decide immediately what next step the court may take where a party fails to perform any act necessary for the progress of a suit.
Civil Procedure — Dismissal under Order 17 rule 4 — Effect
A dismissal of a suit under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules finally disposes of a suit.
Civil Procedure — Adjournments — Exercise of judicial discretion in interests of justice
Where a matter comes before a judge for the first time and a party fails to appear, the court may in the interests of justice grant one final adjournment to allow the party to prosecute their application, notwithstanding a pattern of dilatory conduct, to ensure justice is not hurried.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (2)

  • Kiiza Augustine v Katusabe Vincent (HCT-01-CV-LD-CA-060 of 2013)
  • Ntalo Mohamed v Stanbic Bank of Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 211 of 2017)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ntambara v Segawole (Miscellaneous Application No. 1082 of 2019) [2020] UGCommC 5 (7 February 2020)
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.