Wakilii

Remo v Koboko District Local Governemnt & 9 Others (Civil Suit 16 of 2020)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 1003 · 2024 Preliminary Objection Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on preliminary objection challenging whether civil suit had abated for failure to extract summons for directions
Decision
Preliminary objection dismissed; suit to proceed to hearing on merits

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 3 (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 3 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Citations fading — 4 citing cases on record, 4 in the most recent three data years. 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

The High Court overruled the preliminary objection that the suit had abated. The court held that where a matter is referred by the court for mediation, the plaintiff is not expected to extract summons for directions within 28 days under Order 11A rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019. A court-accredited mediator performs the function of an official referee and the suit therefore falls under the exception in Order 11A rule 4(e). Evidence of a mediation reference on court record sufficed to establish the exception, despite the three-year delay.

Outcome

Preliminary objection dismissed; suit to proceed to hearing on merits

Facts

The plaintiff filed a civil suit on 14 August 2020 for trespass to land, fraud, vacant possession and eviction orders concerning land in Koboko Municipality. Service was effected and the 3rd to 10th defendants filed their written statement of defence on 31 August 2020. For three years thereafter, no steps were taken to prosecute the matter until 18 October 2023. When the suit came up for hearing on that date, counsel for the 3rd and 10th defendants raised a preliminary objection that the suit had abated for failure to extract summons for directions as required by Order 11A rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019. The plaintiff responded that the matter had been referred for mediation and that the failure to extract summons had no effect. Evidence on record showed a mediation reference, though mediation had not been actively pursued.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit had abated for failure to extract summons for directions within the prescribed period under Order 11A rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019.
  2. Whether counsel for the 3rd to 10th defendants had locus to raise the preliminary objection.
  3. Whether the matter fell within the exception under Order 11A rule 4(e) as a case referred for mediation.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection overruled.
  • Suit has not abated.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Abatement of Suits — Failure to Extract Summons for Directions — Exception for Matters Referred to Mediation
Where a matter is referred by the court for mediation, the plaintiff is not required to extract summons for directions within the 28 days prescribed under Order 11A rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019. A court-accredited mediator performs the function of an official referee and the suit therefore falls under the exception provided in Order 11A rule 4(e).
Civil Procedure — Mediators — Status as Official Referees
A court-accredited mediator performs the function of an official referee by presiding over a pending cause referred by the court and reporting back depending on whether an agreement is reached towards an amicable resolution of the dispute. The mediator exercises judicial powers for a specific purpose and therefore fits within the meaning of an official referee as used in Order 11A rule 1(4)(e) of the Civil Procedure Rules as amended in 2019.
Civil Procedure — Abatement of Suits — Intention of Order 11A — Mitigation of Delays
The intention of the framers of Order 11A rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules as amended in 2019 was to mitigate the delays and inefficiencies brought on by the actions of officers of court and parties in civil proceedings.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (2)

  • Carlton Douglas Kasirye v Sheena Ahumuza Bagaine (MA No. 150 of 2020)
  • Kagimu Moses & Others v Sekatwawa Muhamed & Others (Misc. Appeal No. 25 of 2020)

Cases citing this judgment (3)

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.

Remo v Koboko District Local Governemnt & 9 Others (Civil Suit 16 of 2020) [2024] UGHC 1003 (4 October 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.