[2018] UGCA 255

[2018] UGCA 255

The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time, as the particulars of fraud only became known during the trial and were not available at the time of filing the original suit. The absence of the respondents and their counsel, despite being duly served, did not preclude the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] UGCA 255
Parties
Applicant: B. W. Kapiriri; Respondent: International Investments Ltd; Respondent: Kaliisa Karangwa Moses; Respondent: Elizabeth Mwigundu; Respondent: Mitala Buluba Moses; Respondent: Mukungu Balat; Respondent: Buluba Julius Michael
Court
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Application Number 0125 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application granted in part
Judges
Kakuru, JA
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Amendment of Plaint, Fraud in Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Amendment of Plaint Fraud in Land Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. W. Kapiriri

Applicant

International Investments Ltd

Respondent

Kaliisa Karangwa Moses

Respondent

Elizabeth Mwigundu

Respondent

Mitala Buluba Moses

Respondent

Mukungu Balat

Respondent

Buluba Julius Michael

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted extension of time to file an application for leave to appeal against the High Court decision.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal the dismissal of his application to amend the plaint to include fraud.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's appeal should be allowed to proceed despite delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time, as the particulars of fraud only became known during the trial and were not available at the time of filing the original suit. The absence of the respondents and their counsel, despite being duly served, did not preclude the court from proceeding. The interests of justice required that the applicant be allowed to seek leave to appeal the High Court's decision dismissing his application to amend the plaint. The court granted extension of time to file the application for leave, granted leave to appeal, and set a deadline for filing the substantive appeal. The application for stay of proceedings was...

Court Disposition

application granted in part

Orders

  • The applicant is granted extension of time within which to lodge his application for leave to appeal against the decision of Hon. Mr. Justice Namundi Godfrey in Misc. Application No. 170 of 2012 delivered on 19th February 2014.
  • The applicant is granted leave to appeal the decision of the High Court of Uganda at Jinja given on 19th February 2014, dismissing the applicant's application for leave to amend the plaint.