[2020] UGCA 94

[2020] UGCA 94

The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a consent judgment, as such judgments are not appealable under Section 67(2) of the Civil Procedure Act. The consent judgment in question was indeterminate, requiring further verification and agreement between the parties, and did not result in a final decree on compensation. The implementation of the terms of the consent judgment, including directions for verification and involvement of district leaders, cannot be the subject of an appeal. The remedy for any party aggrieved by the execution or terms of a consent judgment is to apply to the High Court to vary or set aside the consent on recognized grounds, not to appeal....

Citation
[2020] UGCA 94
Parties
Appellant: Eng Noah Opwonya and others (on behalf of plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 38 of 2006 and Acholi War Debt Claimants Association); Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
25 June 2020
Case Number
Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal_struck_out
Judges
Kakuru, JA, Madrama, JA, Kiryabwire, JA
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment, Appealability of Decrees, Compensation for War Losses, Verification of Claims
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land and Property Consent Judgment Appealability of Decrees Compensation for War Losses Verification of Claims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eng Noah Opwonya and others (on behalf of plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 38 of 2006 and Acholi War Debt Claimants Association)

Appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal arising from a consent judgment that is indeterminate and not finally executed.
  2. 2 Whether the directions issued by the High Court in the implementation of the consent judgment are appealable.
  3. 3 Whether the orders sought by the applicants in the High Court could be granted in light of the consent judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a consent judgment, as such judgments are not appealable under Section 67(2) of the Civil Procedure Act. The consent judgment in question was indeterminate, requiring further verification and agreement between the parties, and did not result in a final decree on compensation. The implementation of the terms of the consent judgment, including directions for verification and involvement of district leaders, cannot be the subject of an appeal. The remedy for any party aggrieved by the execution or terms of a consent judgment is to apply to the High Court to vary or set aside the consent on recognized grounds, not to appeal....

Court Disposition

appeal_struck_out

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.