Nuhu Ntege v Sulaiman Aidah Tennia and Others (Civil Application No. 516 of 2026)

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.

Holding

A single Justice of the Court of Appeal granted the applicant leave to serve Civil Application No. 609 of 2025 on the respondents by substituted service. The court held that substituted service may be ordered where personal service is not possible and reasonable efforts to trace and serve the respondents have been made and failed. The respondents did not live on the suit land and their whereabouts were unknown, and a process server had attempted service and successfully served eight respondents in the main application but failed to serve those in this application. Having given sufficient reason for the failure of personal service, the applicant was granted leave to serve by newspaper publication.

Outcome

Application granted; applicant permitted to serve the respondents by substituted service through newspaper publication

Facts

The applicant filed High Court Civil Suit No. 439 of 2013 against the respondents, in which judgment was not in his favour. He subsequently filed Miscellaneous Application No. 951 of 2024 to review that judgment and Miscellaneous Application No. 1084 of 2025 seeking leave to appeal the ruling in the former, both of which were dismissed. The respondents never entered appearance at the High Court, and the applicant proceeded ex parte throughout, having been granted leave to do so after failing to trace them. Dissatisfied with the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 1084 of 2025, the applicant filed Civil Application No. 609 of 2025 in the Court of Appeal seeking leave to appeal. He managed to serve some respondents but could not serve those named in this application because they do not live on the suit land and their whereabouts are unknown, appearing only on the certificates of title. A process server attempted service and succeeded against eight respondents in the main application but failed against the respondents here.

Issues

1. Whether the applicant satisfied the legal requirements for the grant of an order of substituted service of Civil Application No. 609 of 2025 on the respondents.

Orders

• The applicant is granted leave to serve Civil Application No. 609 of 2025 on the 1st to 8th respondents by substituted service.
• The applicant shall publish the notice of Civil Application No. 609 of 2025 once in the New Vision and once in Bukedde on two consecutive working days within 30 days from the date of this order, the advert being quarter page (15cm x 3 column).
• Costs of this application shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Judicature Act Cap. 16 s.12(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules S.I No. 13-10 r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules S.I No. 13-10 r.43(1) and (2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules S.I No. 13-10 r.44(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules S.I No. 13-10 r.18(1)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 5 r.18(1)

Cases cited (1)

• Kamurasi v Accord Properties Limited & Another (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1996)

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