[2025] UGCommC 209
The court found that both parties failed to appear when the suit was called for hearing, constituting a failure to take necessary steps to advance the case. Given the suit's age and its contribution to case backlog, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] UGCommC 209
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Arch Design Limited; Defendant: Walusimbi Garage Limited
- Court
- Commercial Court of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Civil Suit No: 32 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Hearing Attendance and Dismissal
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for non-appearance of parties
- Judges
- Susan Odongo, J
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Non Appearance, Case Backlog Management, Court Discretion, Procedural Compliance
- 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
Arch Design Limited
Plaintiff
Walusimbi Garage Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Hearing Attendance and Dismissal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for non-appearance of both parties at the hearing.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules to determine the suit immediately.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both parties failed to appear when the suit was called for hearing, constituting a failure to take necessary steps to advance the case. Given the suit's age and its contribution to case backlog, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution. The court emphasized the importance of parties adhering to procedural timelines and attending hearings to facilitate expeditious disposal of cases, especially in light of the judiciary's efforts to manage backlog.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for non-appearance of parties
Orders
- The suit is dismissed pursuant to Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
## 5 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) CIVIL SUIT NO: 0032 OF 2019
10 ARCH DESIGN LIMITED ======================= PLAINTIFF
## VERSUS
#### WALUSIMBI GARAGE LIMITED ==============DEFENDANT
# BEFORE: HON. LADY JUSTICE SUSAN ODONGO
### RULING
This matter was cause listed for hearing and the cause list widely circulated. 20 Hearing notice was issued via ECCMIS. However, when this matter was called on for hearing, the parties did not appear.
It is needful to state that the judiciary is currently burdened with case backlog, and courts have adopted a stricter stance regarding adherence to timelines established to facilitate the expeditious disposal of cases. When a suit is called 25 on by the court for hearing or for any related matter, it is incumbent upon parties to respond punctually and diligently to prosecute their matter, failure to do so results in the unnecessary consumption of the court's valuable time.
Therefore, where parties default in taking actions necessary to facilitate the expeditious progression of the case, Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules,
30 S. I. 17-1 guides the Court on how to proceed. The provision states;
*Where any party to a suit to whom time has been granted fails to produce his or her evidence, or to cause the attendance of his or her witnesses, or to perform any other act necessary to the further progress of the suit, for which time has been allowed, the court*
5 *may, notwithstanding that default, proceed to decide the suit immediately. (emphasis mine).*
The performance of any other act necessary to the further progress of the suit, may comprise, filing necessary documents, complying with procedural orders, attending hearings. The determination of the suit, forthwith, is a matter within
10 the Court's discretion that lies with court.
Notably, since this suit was filed in 2019, it undoubtedly, is part of case backlog. In this case, the parties' failure to appear when the suit was called on for hearing constitutes a failure to take any further steps necessary to advance the case. An act proper for the exercise by this court of the discretion under Order 17 rule 4
15 of The Civil Procedure Rules.
Thus, there being no appearance by the parties, I hereby dismiss this suit pursuant to Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
I so order.
