Opio v Lamunu (High Court Miscellaneous Application 192 of 2022)

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

Held that the application for extension of time to file a written statement of defence out of time is granted. The court found that the previous judgment from Alternative Dispute Resolution had been set aside on review and the suit ordered to be heard interparty. No written statement of defence had been filed by the applicant's former counsel. For the suit to be properly heard and determined, the applicant's defence must be on record. The claim that a pending appeal bars proceedings was found inconsequential given that the review had set aside the judgment complained of in the appeal.

Outcome

Application granted; applicant permitted to file written statement of defence out of time

Facts

The respondent originally instituted Civil Suit No. 005 of 2012 against Etengu Joham. She later amended the plaint to add the applicant as second defendant. The amended plaint was served on the applicant's father in June 2015, who informed counsel that the applicant was a minor. In 2016, the applicant's former lawyers filed an application seeking appointment of a guardian ad litem, which was allowed by consent. The court directed both parties to file amended pleadings, but this was not done. Justice Batema NDA proceeded to conduct Alternative Dispute Resolution in the absence of pleadings, resulting in a judgment. The applicant filed for review, which was allowed by Justice Tadeo Asiimwe on 26 November 2021. The suit was ordered to be heard interparty. Upon instructing new lawyers, it was discovered that the former lawyers had not filed a written statement of defence. The applicant filed this application seeking an extension of time to file the defence out of time.

Issues

1. Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to file a written statement of defence out of time.
2. Whether the existence of a pending appeal in the Court of Appeal bars the High Court from proceeding with the matter.

Orders

• Application allowed.
• Costs of the application to be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (3)

• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 51 rule 6
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1 and 8

Cases cited (1)

• Julius Rwabinumi v Hope Bahimbisomwe (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 14 of 2009)

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