Wakilii

Ssenkomi Herman and Another v Ssemakula Moses (Miscellaneous Application No. 1714 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 248 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ex parte application for certificate of urgency to hear contempt application during court vacation
Decision
Application for certificate of urgency dismissed; applicants to seek hearing date after court vacation

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 declined to grant a certificate of urgency for hearing a contempt application during court vacation. The applicants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency where they waited seven months after an alleged attack to file their contempt application, creating a self-created urgency. The court held that earlier action could and should have been taken in December 2024 or January 2025.

Outcome

Application for certificate of urgency dismissed; applicants to seek hearing date after court vacation

Facts

The applicants filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1697 of 2025 alleging the respondent was in contempt of temporary injunctive orders issued on 27 April 2023 concerning land comprised in LRV 4359, Folio 17, Block 7, Plot 130 in Kibuye, Makindye Division. The applicants alleged that on 23 December 2024, the respondent attacked the first applicant's property, destroying business equipment and threatening eviction. The applicants reported the matter to police but did not seek a contempt order until 31 July 2025, seven months after the alleged attack. They then sought a certificate of urgency to have their contempt application heard during court vacation, citing ongoing threats of eviction by the respondent and his agents.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants demonstrated exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency sufficient to warrant the grant of a certificate of urgency to hear their application during court vacation.
  2. Whether the urgency was self-created by the applicants' delay in seeking legal remedy.

Orders

  • Certificate of urgency not granted.
  • Applicants advised to obtain the nearest hearing date from the Trial Judge through their lawyers for hearing of Miscellaneous Application No. 1697 of 2025 when court operations resume after vacation.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Court Vacation — Certificate of Urgency — Requirements for Grant
For an application for a certificate of urgency to merit consideration, the application must disclose exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency and must not involve a self-created urgency by the applicant where earlier action could have been taken to seek legal remedy.
Court Vacation — Certificate of Urgency — Self-Created Urgency
Where an applicant waits seven months after an alleged breach of court orders to file a contempt application and then seeks urgent hearing during court vacation, the urgency is self-created and does not warrant the grant of a certificate of urgency.
Court Vacation — Scope of Civil Business — Mandatory Requirement of Urgency
The use of the word 'shall' in Rule 4 of the Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules means that it is mandatory that the matter to which an application for a certificate of urgency applies should be urgent in nature before the court can deal with civil business during vacation.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (1)

  • Edge Technologies Limited v KCB Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 310 of 2025)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ssenkomi_Herman_and_Another_v_Ssemakula_Moses_(Miscellaneous_Application_No._1714_of_2025)_[2025]_UGHCLD_248_(12_August_2025)
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.