Prof. G. S. Z Ssenyonga and Another v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application 10 of 1999)
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
The Court of Appeal, on an application for extension of time to apply for a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court, held that under rule 4 of the Rules of the Court an extension is granted where sufficient reason relating to the failure to act in time is shown. The delay arose from the default of the applicants' instructed advocates who, having filed Notices of Appeal, failed to apply for the required certificate. The court held that the fault of an advocate causing delay cannot be visited on the client and constitutes sufficient reason for extension. The application was allowed and the applicants were directed to file their application for a certificate within seven days.
Outcome
Application for extension of time allowed; applicants to file application for a certificate within 7 days
Facts
The applicants had a Notice of Appeal filed against a judgment of the Court of Appeal but no application for a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court was made within the prescribed time. The judgment had been read by the Registrar rather than a full court, before whom an informal application for a certificate could not have been made. The applicants' firm of advocates, M/S Kanyunyuzi & Co. Advocates, was later instructed to prosecute the appeal to the Supreme Court. On checking the court registry, it became apparent that, although Notices of Appeal had been filed, no application for a certificate had been made and the time within which to do so had expired. The applicants sought an extension of time, attributing the delay to the default of their advocates.
Issues
- Whether the applicants showed sufficient reason for extension of time to apply for a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court.
- Whether the fault of an advocate causing delay constitutes sufficient reason for extension of time.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Applicants to file their application for a certificate within 7 days from the date of the Ruling.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 4
- Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 40(1)
- Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 42(1)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.