Wakilii

Roba Peresi Kei v Kabali Fred and Others [2026] UGHCLD 78

High Court · 2026 Suit Dismissed for Want of Prosecution AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Court's own-motion ruling dismissing a first instance land suit for want of prosecution
Decision
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs

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, invoking its inherent powers under section 17(2)(a) of the Judicature Act and section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, dismissed the suit for want of prosecution. The plaintiff had filed a plaint in August 2025 and thereafter filed no further pleadings or documents and took no steps to move the matter forward. Applying Nilani v Patel, the Court held that a plaintiff pursuing a remedy must take all necessary steps available to secure expeditious determination of the claim, and that a litigant may not leave the conduct of the case to the court. The suit was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs

Facts

The plaintiff, suing through her attorneys, filed a plaint on the ECCMIS electronic filing system on 19 August 2025 in the Land Division of the High Court against four defendants. After filing the plaint, the plaintiff filed no further pleadings or documents in the matter and took no steps to prosecute or otherwise progress the suit. The Court, on considering the inactivity on the record, moved to determine whether the suit should be allowed to remain pending.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution where the plaintiff filed only a plaint and took no further steps to prosecute the claim.

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution under Section 17(2)(a) of the Judicature Act Cap 16 and Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 282.
  • There is no order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Dismissal for Want of Prosecution — Duty of Plaintiff to Take Steps
A plaintiff in pursuit of a remedy must take all necessary steps at his or her disposal to achieve an expeditious determination of the claim; failure to file any further pleadings or take any step after filing the plaint justifies dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers of the High Court — Curtailing Delay and Abuse of Process
The High Court may invoke its inherent powers under section 17(2)(a) of the Judicature Act and section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to prevent abuse of process by curtailing delayed prosecutions, including by discontinuing a suit that a plaintiff has left dormant.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Nilani Vs. Patel & others (1969) EA, 340, at page 341

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Roba Peresi Kei v Kabali Fred and Others [2026] UGHCLD 78 (18 March 2026)
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.