[2013] UGHCCD 39

[2013] UGHCCD 39

The court held that the applicant's joinder as a co-defendant was not necessary under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules because the main suit's issues—trespass and compulsory acquisition—are solely between the plaintiff and the 2nd and 3rd respondents. The applicant is neither alleged to have trespassed nor to have compulsorily acquired the land. The dispute over entitlement to compensation is between the plaintiff and the applicant and is already the subject of a separate suit in the Family Division, where the administration of the estate is being contested. Therefore, joining the applicant would not assist in the complete adjudication of the issues in the main suit and...

Citation
[2013] UGHCCD 39
Parties
Applicant: Abdul Karim Kiwanyi; Respondent: Hakeem Lukenge; Respondent: Uganda National Roads Authority; Respondent: COWI Uganda Ltd
Court
HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
15 March 2013
Case Number
Misc Application No. 587 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Co Defendant
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Order 1 Rule 10, Discretion of Court, Compensation Disputes
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Joinder of Parties Order 1 Rule 10 Discretion of Court Compensation Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdul Karim Kiwanyi

Applicant

Hakeem Lukenge

Respondent

Uganda National Roads Authority

Respondent

COWI Uganda Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Co Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be joined as a co-defendant to HCCS No. 315 of 2012 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's presence is necessary for the court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant's joinder as a co-defendant was not necessary under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules because the main suit's issues—trespass and compulsory acquisition—are solely between the plaintiff and the 2nd and 3rd respondents. The applicant is neither alleged to have trespassed nor to have compulsorily acquired the land. The dispute over entitlement to compensation is between the plaintiff and the applicant and is already the subject of a separate suit in the Family Division, where the administration of the estate is being contested. Therefore, joining the applicant would not assist in the complete adjudication of the issues in the main suit and...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent

Orders

  • The application for joinder is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the 1st respondent.