[2021] UGIC 13
The court found that Labour Dispute Claim No. 132/2014 was filed in the High Court in 2012 and referred to the Industrial Court in 2014. Since then, the claimant has not taken any steps to prosecute the claim. Applying Order 17 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which allows for dismissal of suits where no action...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] UGIC 13
- Parties
- Applicant: Barclays Bank of Uganda; Respondent: Miriam Omono
- Court
- Industrial Court of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- H.C.Miscellaneous Application No. 86 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application_granted
- Judges
- Gidongo, Panel Member, Ruhinda-Ntengye, J, Tumusiime-Mugisha, J
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Labour Dispute Claims, Court Backlog Management
- 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
Barclays Bank of Uganda
Applicant
Miriam Omono
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Labour Dispute Claim No. 132/2014 should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether the claimant has taken any steps to prosecute the claim since its referral to the Industrial Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Labour Dispute Claim No. 132/2014 was filed in the High Court in 2012 and referred to the Industrial Court in 2014. Since then, the claimant has not taken any steps to prosecute the claim. Applying Order 17 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which allows for dismissal of suits where no action has been taken for two years, the court determined that the claim was ripe for dismissal. The absence of any action by the claimant for an extended period justified the dismissal to prevent backlog and ensure efficient administration of justice.
Court Disposition
application_granted
Orders
- Labour Dispute Claim No. 132/2014 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
# **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA MISC. APPL. NO. 086 OF 2018 (ARISING FROM LABOUR DISPUTE CLAIM NO. 132/2014)**
**BARCLAYS BANK OF UGANDA ………………….. APPLICANT**
## **VERSUS**
**MIRIAM OMONO………………..…………….…....…RESPONDENT**
#### **BEFORE**
- 1. Hon. Chief Judge Ruhinda Asaph Ntengye - 2. Hon. Lady Justice Lillian Linda Tumusiime Mugisha
#### **PANELISTS**
- 1. Mr. Rwomushana Jack Reuben - 2. Ms. Rose Gidongo - 3. Mr. Beatrice Achiro
#### **RULING**
This is an application that seeks dismissal of labour claim 132/2014 for want of prosecution. It was brought under **Section 33 of the Judicature Act, Section 98 of Civil Procedure Act, Section 8(2) & 40 of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement Act) 2006** and **Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.**
The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by one David Semakula Mukiibi, an advocate of the High Court practicing with MMAKS Advocates, counsel for the applicant.
We have perused the Notice of motion together with the affidavit in support. It is our finding that indeed Labour Dispute Claim No.132/2014 was originally filed in the High Court on 8/4/2012 and in 2014 it was referred by the High court to this Court and since then, the claimant/plaintiff has not taken any step towards prosecuting the same.
In his submission Counsel for the applicant implored Court to strike out the claim for want of prosecution since it was one of the cases causing backlog.
Order XVII (17 rule 6) provides:
### **"6 Suit may be dismissed if no step taken for two years**
**(1)In any case, not otherwise provided for, in which no application is made or Step taken for a period of two years by either party with a view to proceeding with suit, the court may order the suit to be dismissed.**
The claim having been filed in the High Court in 2012 and having been referred to this court in 2014, and the claimant having not taken any step with a view to proceeding with the same, we agree with C ounsel that it is ripe for dismissal and it is so dismissed under **017rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules**. No order as to costs is made.
## **Delivered & signed by:**
1. Hon. Chief Judge Ruhinda Asaph Ntengye
……………………..
| | | | 2. Hon. Lady Justice Lillian Linda Tumusiime Mugisha | …………………… | | |--|--|--|------------------------------------------------------|----------|--| | | | | | | |
#### **PANELISTS**
| 1. | Mr. Rwomushana Jack Reuben | …………………… | |----|------------------------------|----------| | 2. | Ms. Rose Gidongo | …………………… | | 3. | Mr. Beatrice Achiro<br>Akeny | …………………… |
Dated: 30/04/2021