Wancha and 8 Others v Onya (Miscellaneous Application 65 of 2023)
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 High Court dismissed an application to strike off two named appellants from a memorandum of appeal. The applicants alleged the inclusion of Wancha Musa and Maraka John Stephen was a typing error and that one had died. The court held that the applicants failed to prove their allegations on a balance of probabilities, lacked documentary evidence of death or lack of instructions, and failed to serve the application on the parties sought to be struck off. Striking parties off without proper evidence and service would work an injustice.
Outcome
Application to strike off two named appellants from the memorandum of appeal dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence and proper service
Facts
The applicants brought an application to strike off the names of Wancha Musa and Maraka John Stephen from a memorandum of appeal in Land Civil Appeal No. 37 of 2022, alleging their inclusion was an honest typing error. The applicants' law firm claimed it was initially instructed by five persons and later joined by two others, but not by the two persons sought to be struck off. The applicants alleged that Wancha Musa had died during lower court proceedings. The memorandum of appeal contained the names of all defendants as appearing in the lower court judgment. The applicants failed to attach the memorandum of appeal to their application or provide documentary evidence of Wancha Musa's death. No affidavit of service was filed showing that the two persons sought to be struck off had been served with the application.
Issues
- Whether the application to strike off two named appellants from the memorandum of appeal has merit.
- What remedy is available to the parties.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
- Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.19
- Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.31
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.10(2)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.13
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Art.126(2)(e)
- Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.101
- Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.102
- Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.103
Cases cited (4)
- Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
- Balaba Emmanuel and 6 Others v Mawejje Hanifa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 07 of 2021)
- Soroti Municipal Council v Akello Juliet and Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 014 of 2020)
- Dr Chrispus Kiyonga v Kahyana Jolly (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 0071 of 2022)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.