Wakilii

Waiharo wa Kingate v Kamuete wa Nginyi (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1927)

East African Court of Appeal · [1927] EACA 13 · 1927 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from 3rd Class Subordinate Court at Kyambu, which heard an appeal from a Native Tribunal decision concerning marriage price repayment
Decision
The Native Tribunal's award of thirty goats to the respondent was set aside and the appeal allowed

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 held that the law of limitation applies to suits in appeals from Native Tribunals because such appeals must be dealt with as original cases under Native Tribunal Rules 1918 s.14, and court procedure includes limitation law regardless of parties' status. The Kenya Order-in-Council 1921 Article 7 provides discretionary authority to apply limitation law to achieve substantial justice. The appeal was allowed on grounds that permitting a suit on a cause of action arising at least twenty-seven years prior would inflict injustice.

Outcome

The Native Tribunal's award of thirty goats to the respondent was set aside and the appeal allowed

Facts

Around 1899 or 1900, the respondent's father paid sixty-five goats and five rams for the appellant's sister in marriage. She returned to her father and twenty goats were returned to the respondent's father. She subsequently returned to the respondent's father. During the great famine they separated again and the woman went off with an Mkamba who allegedly paid 100 or 120 goats for her. The respondent brought suit in the Native Tribunal approximately twenty-seven years later (last year, 1926) seeking return of the balance of the marriage price his father had paid. The Native Tribunal awarded him thirty goats, upheld on appeal by the Assistant District Commissioner.

Issues

  1. Whether the law of limitation applies to suits brought by natives in appeals from Native Tribunals.
  2. Whether a suit based on a cause of action arising approximately twenty-seven years prior should be permitted.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Costs awarded to the appellant in both Courts.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Limitation — Application to Native Tribunal Appeals
When an appeal from a Native Tribunal is heard, it must be dealt with as if it were an original case, and the court is therefore bound by the procedure applicable to suits, which includes the relevant law of limitation.
Statutory Interpretation — Discretionary Application of Limitation Law
The Kenya Order-in-Council 1921 Article 7 provides sufficient authority for the court to exercise discretion in applying the law of limitation to effect substantial justice.
Civil Procedure — Limitation — Applicability to Natives
The law of limitation is applicable to suits regardless of whether one or both litigants are natives.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Indian Limitation Act 1877
  • Kenya Order-in-Council 1921 Article 7
  • Native Tribunal Rules 1918 s.14

Cases cited (2)

  • Civil Appeal No. 42 of 1925
  • Athman b Mohamed v Abdulhusein Karimji (7 EALR 5)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Waiharo wa Kingate v Kamuete wa Nginyi (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1927) [1927] EACA 13 (1 January 1927)
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.