Wakilii

Okot & 4 Others v Abok (Miscellaneous Application 133 of 2022)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 199 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to strike out a civil appeal on grounds that it was lodged outside the statutory time limit
Decision
Application dismissed; Civil Appeal No. 015 of 2022 remains pending

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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

Application to strike out appeal dismissed. The applicant bore the burden of proving the appeal was lodged outside time. Without evidence showing when the trial court record and judgment were availed to the appellant, the court could not find the appeal was filed late. The exception under Section 79(2) CPA excludes time taken to prepare and avail the record to the appellant.

Outcome

Application dismissed; Civil Appeal No. 015 of 2022 remains pending

Facts

The applicants sought to strike out Civil Appeal No. 015 of 2022 on grounds it was lodged outside the statutory 30-day period under Section 79(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Act. The appeal challenged a decision by Magistrate Grade One Susan Anyeko delivered on 21 January 2022, with the appeal lodged on 15 March 2022. The judgment was certified on 4 February 2022. The applicants did not attach the trial court record or provide evidence of when the judgment and record were availed to the respondent (the appellant in the impugned appeal). The respondent did not participate in the application proceedings.

Issues

  1. Whether Civil Appeal No. 015 of 2022 was lodged outside the statutory time limit under Section 79(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Act.
  2. Whether the applicant discharged the burden of proving that the appeal was filed outside time.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Burden of Proof
Where a party seeks to strike out an appeal on the ground that it was lodged outside the statutory time limit, that party bears the burden of proving the appeal was filed outside time.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Section 79 CPA — Exclusion of Time
Under Section 79(2) of the Civil Procedure Act, time taken to prepare and avail the record of proceedings to an appellant is excluded when computing the statutory time limit for lodging an appeal.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Proof Required
In the absence of evidence showing when the trial court record and judgment were availed to the appellant, a court cannot determine whether an appeal was lodged outside the statutory time limit.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Otto Marcello & 4 Others Vs. Kinyera Patrick
  • Godfrey Tuwangye Kazzora v Georgina Katarikwenda [1992-1993] 145
  • Ephraim Ongom and Another v Francis Benega (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1987)

Cases citing this judgment (2)

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

↓ Download PDF

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

Okot & 4 Others v Abok (Miscellaneous Application 133 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 199 (9 April 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.