Sadraddin Valimahomed v Departed Asians Property Custodian Board and Others (Miscellaneous Application 1125 of 2022)
Observed later treatment
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 High Court granted leave to appeal out of time where the typed ruling was not made available to counsel until 27th June 2022, 25 days after the oral ruling on 2nd June 2022, placing the applicant outside the seven-day appeal period prescribed by section 79 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court held that the delay in availing the typed ruling constituted sufficient cause for the extension.
Outcome
Leave to appeal out of time granted
Facts
On 8th March 2022, the applicant filed an application for a temporary injunction. The Assistant Registrar delivered a ruling on 2nd June 2022 dismissing the application. The applicant sought to appeal but the typed ruling was not made available on the date of delivery. On 6th June 2022, the applicant's advocates requested a typed copy of the ruling. The typed ruling was only uploaded on the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS) on 27th June 2022. By that date, the seven-day period for appealing the registrar's ruling under section 79 of the Civil Procedure Act had expired. The applicant therefore filed this application seeking leave to appeal out of time, arguing that sufficient cause existed because the delay in receiving the typed ruling prevented a timely appeal.
Issues
- Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant the grant of leave to appeal out of time against the Assistant Registrar's ruling dated 2nd June 2022.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal out of time in respect of the Assistant Registrar's ruling dated 2nd June 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 286 of 2022 is granted.
- Costs shall be determined in the main Cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
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
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.