Wanyama Bwandene Seperia v Kampala Capital City Authority (Civil Application 26 of 2021)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal struck out the respondent's appeal for failure to take an essential step. It first dismissed the respondent's preliminary objection that the application had been served out of time, accepting the applicant's explanation (supported by the deployment date of the endorsing Deputy Registrar) that the application was filed in 2021 but endorsed and served in 2022. On the merits, the respondent did not specifically answer the affidavit averments that the record and memorandum of appeal were filed out of time without leave; relying on Gandesha and SEREFACO, the Court treated the unchallenged averments as true. The respondent's own admission of late filing confirmed the omission, warranting striking out.

Outcome

Application allowed; Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2021 struck out for being filed out of time, with costs to the applicant

Facts

The applicants obtained judgment in a judicial review cause challenging the respondent's decision to halt their deployment due to budgetary constraints. The respondent lodged a notice of appeal but did not serve the applicants with a lodged memorandum and record of appeal. The applicants wrote to the court and were told no such documents were on record. They filed Civil Application No. 26 of 2021 to strike out the notice of appeal for failure to lodge the memorandum and record within 60 days. Hours later, the respondent served a record and memorandum of appeal, which were out of time and filed without leave. The respondent objected that the strike-out application itself was served out of time, alleging it had been endorsed by court in November 2021 but served in November 2022. The applicant showed the endorsing Deputy Registrar was only deployed to the Court in December 2021, so the application was in fact endorsed in November 2022 and served the next day.

Issues

1. Whether the application to strike out the notice of appeal was incompetent for having been served out of time.
2. Whether the respondent omitted to take an essential step in the appellate process by failing to lodge a memorandum and record of appeal within the prescribed time.
3. Whether the applicant was entitled to the orders sought.

Orders

• The preliminary objection on late service of the application is rejected.
• The application is allowed with costs to the applicant.
• Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2021 is struck out for being filed out of time.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.82
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.83
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.112
• Civil Procedure Act s.27
• Civil Procedure Rules S.I. 71-1 O.49 r.2
• Civil Procedure Rules S.I. 71-1 O.5 r.1

Cases cited (8)

• Ibrahim Abiriga Y.A. v Musema Mudathir Bruce (Election Petition Application No. 24 of 2016)
• Utex Industries v Attorney General (Civil Appeal No. 52 of 1995)
• Andrew Maviri v Jomayi Property Consultants (Civil Application No. 274 of 2014)
• Muwanga Kivumbi v Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 06 of 2011)
• Kanyabwera v Tumwebwe [2005] 2 EA 86
• H.G. Gandesha v G.J. Lutaya (Civil Application No. 14 of 1989)
• SEREFACO Consultants Ltd v EURO Consult BV (Civil Application No. 16 of 2007)
• Chief V.C. Obumseli v Chinyelugo P. Uwakwe (2019) LPELR-46937 (SC)

Cases citing this judgment (8)

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.

• Meera Investments Limited v DFCU Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application 1615 of 2024)
• Alex Kanyonyi Kaaya and Another v Uganda Development Bank and Others (Miscellaneous Application 1650 of 2025)
• Terzol Jobey v Kirunda Joseph alias Kirunda Joseph Dan (Miscellaneous Cause No. 254 of 2024) distinguished
• Mahathi Infra Uganda Limited & 2 Others v Hadson (Miscellaneous Appeal 43 of 2023)
• Uganda Revenue Authority v Urgent Cargo Handling Limited & Another (Civil Appeal 20 of 2018)
• Kizito v Nsubuga & 6 Others (Civil Application 28 of 2021)
• Kizito v Nsubuga and 6 Others (Civil Application 28 of 2021)
• Kyarisiima Florence and Others v Kamanyire Stephen (Civil Suit No. 0073 of 2016; Miscellaneous Application No.17 of 2022)

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