Wakilii

Okello v Okello (Miscellaneous Application 32 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 1114 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to file a memorandum of appeal out of time, arising from judgment of Chief Magistrate's Court Patongo in Civil Suit No. 29/2019
Decision
Applicant granted leave to file memorandum of appeal out of time within 30 days; Notice of Appeal struck out

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

Held that an application for leave to appeal out of time may originate from the suit itself, not from an incompetent notice of appeal. Illiteracy and ignorance of the procedural requirement to file a memorandum of appeal within 30 days constitutes sufficient cause for grant of enlargement of time. The notice of appeal was struck out but leave to appeal out of time was granted, with the applicant ordered to file a memorandum of appeal within 30 days.

Outcome

Applicant granted leave to file memorandum of appeal out of time within 30 days; Notice of Appeal struck out

Facts

The applicant sought leave to file a memorandum of appeal out of time arising from Civil Suit No. 29/2019 decided by the Chief Magistrate's Court at Patongo. Judgment was delivered on 11 May 2023. The applicant filed only a notice of appeal on 23 May 2023 but no memorandum of appeal within the prescribed 30 days. This application for enlargement of time was filed on 6 March 2024, approximately 10 months after judgment. The applicant claimed he was illiterate, unrepresented in the lower court, ignorant of legal procedures, and delayed in accessing the record of proceedings. The respondent opposed, arguing that the certified judgment and proceedings were available from 4 August 2023, that the appeal arose from an incompetent notice of appeal, and that ignorance of procedure is no excuse.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is competently before the court.
  2. Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for the court to judiciously exercise its discretion to enlarge time or grant leave to appeal out of time.

Orders

  • Miscellaneous Application No. 032/2024 is granted.
  • The Applicant is granted leave to Appeal out of time by filing a Memorandum of Appeal within Thirty (30) days of the delivery of this decision.
  • Notice of Appeal vide Civil Appeal No. 11/2023 is struck out.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Institution of Appeal — Notice of Appeal vs Memorandum of Appeal
An appeal to the High Court from a lower court must be instituted by presenting a memorandum of appeal with grounds concisely framed as required by Order 43 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Filing a notice of appeal instead of a memorandum of appeal is an error in law and of no consequence in furthering an intended appeal.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Defective Appeals — Competence of Applications
Where an application for leave to appeal out of time references an incompetent notice of appeal in its title, the application itself is not rendered incompetent. The application originates from the suit itself of which the judgment is the subject of the intended appeal, and the reference to the incompetent appeal number is merely superfluous.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Order 6 Rule 2 Requirements — Summary of Evidence and Lists
Failure to include a summary of evidence, list of witnesses, list of documents, and list of authorities as required by Order 6 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules in an application is not always fatal and may be cured by prompt compliance. In applications, the affidavit already contains the evidence, witnesses are apparent from the deponents, authorities are cited in the title, and documents must be commissioned and attached.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Enlargement of Time — Ignorance of Law as Good Cause
Illiteracy and lack of awareness of the procedural requirement to file a memorandum of appeal within the prescribed time limit may constitute sufficient cause for grant of leave to appeal out of time, particularly where an unrepresented litigant prepared and filed a notice of appeal himself without the aid of counsel.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (16)

  • Tight Security Ltd v Chartis Insurance Co. Ltd & Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 8 of 2014)
  • Molly Kyalukinda Turinawe & Others v Engineer Turinawe & Another (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 27 of 2010)
  • Ogbuonye Gerald v Kawooya John Alex (Civil Appeal No. 40 of 2016)
  • Bigirwa Moses & Another v Yoweri Kaguta Museveni (Miscellaneous Cause No. 63 of 2016)
  • Basile Difasi & 3 Others v The National Unity Platform & Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 226 of 2020)
  • Richard Mwirivumbi v Jada Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 978 of 1996)
  • Hosea Sonko & Others v D. K. Banoba (Miscellaneous Application No. 122 of 2018)
  • Shanti v Hindocha [1973] EA 207
  • Mugo v Wanjiri (1970) EA 481
  • Kasirye, Byaruhanga & Co. Advocates v Uganda Development Bank (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1997)
  • Horizon Coaches v Edward Rurangaranga (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2009)
  • Kizito Conrad v National Medical Stores (High Court Civil Suit No. 819 of 1998)
  • DFCU Leasing Co. Ltd v Nasolo Faridah (Miscellaneous Application No. 74 of 2007)
  • Sanlam General Insurance Ltd v Quality Milk Dairies Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 257 of 2022)
  • Samwiri Kibuuka v Eriya Lugeya Lubanga (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 656 of 2005)
  • Obonyo Peter v Otto Alex Atik & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 140 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Okello v Okello (Miscellaneous Application 32 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 1114 (27 December 2024)
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.