[2023] UGHCCD 240
The court found that the applicant and their counsel failed to appear for formal proof on the scheduled date and did not provide any reason for their absence. This absence was interpreted as a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit or an inability to adduce evidence. Consequently, the matter was dismissed for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCCD 240
- Parties
- Applicant: Arab Contractors; Respondent: Otai John Michael
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 58 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- Adonyo, J
- Legal Topics
- Ex Parte Proceedings, Dismissal for Non Prosecution, Setting Aside Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Arab Contractors
Applicant
Otai John Michael
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the order dismissing Miscellaneous Application No. 0026 of 2023 should be set aside.
- 2 Whether Civil Suit No. 0002 of 2021 should proceed inter parte.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded for this application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant and their counsel failed to appear for formal proof on the scheduled date and did not provide any reason for their absence. This absence was interpreted as a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit or an inability to adduce evidence. Consequently, the matter was dismissed for non-prosecution. The subsequent application to set aside the dismissal was rendered moot by these events, and the court held that there was no basis to grant the orders sought. The application was therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- This application is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
The Republic of Uganda In The High Court of Uganda at Soroti Miscellaneous Application No. 0058 of 2023 (Arising from Miscellaneous Application No. 0026 of 2023) (All arising from Civil Suit No. 0002 of 2021)
$\mathsf{S}$
Arab Contractors ============================= Applicant
Versus
=================== Respondent Otai John Michael ============ 15
## Before: Hon. Justice Dr Henry Peter Adonyo
## Ruling
This is an application by way of Notice of motion brought under section 98
- of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 52 rules 1,2&3 of the Civil Procedure 20 Rules for orders that the order dismissing Miscellaneous Application No. 0026 of 2023 seeking to set aside the order issued on the 21<sup>st</sup> day of January 2023 allowing the respondent to proceed ex-parte be set aside and Civil Suit No. 0002 of 2021 proceeds inter parte and costs of this application - be provided for. 25
The grounds of the application are contained in the application and affidavit in support, the respondent filed his affidavit in reply.
The applicant was represented by M/s Okiror, Ourum & Co. Advocates while the respondent was represented by M/s Latigo & Co. Advocates who
proceeded by way of written submissions. 30
- $\mathsf{S}$ This application is essentially concerned with the proceeding of CS 0002/2021 ex-parte as ordered by this court on the $21^{st}$ day of January 2023. On the 13/04/2023 counsel for the plaintiff Ms. Alice Latigo in the absence of the defendants and their counsel prayed that the suit proceeds *ex parte* and be set for formal proof. - Court noted that on 14/03/2023 counsel for the defendants and the 10 defendants were present in court when the date was set for scheduling, given that no reason for their absence was given court agreed that the matter should proceed for formal proof after an interlocutory judgement had been entered. - The $13/07/2023$ was agreed on as the date for formal proof, however, on 15 this date neither the plaintiff nor counsel entered appearance. On 13/04/2023 the plaintiff and counsel who had fixed the matter for formal proof on 13/07/2023 did not turn up and no reason was given. Court found that the absence of the plaintiff and counsel signified their loss - of interest in proceeding or that the plaintiff had no evidence to adduce 20 and as such the matter was accordingly dismissed due to non-prosecution with no order as to costs.
This being the case this application has been taken over by events and as such is of no consequence.
This application is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 25 I so order.
Adonyo, J $22<sup>nd</sup>$ August 2023
$\overline{2}$
30