[2009] UGCommC 29

[2009] UGCommC 29

The application for judicial review was fatally defective for two reasons: first, it was commenced by originating summons instead of by notice of motion as required by Rule 6 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009; second, it was filed outside the three-month limitation period prescribed by Rule 5 of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UGCommC 29
Parties
Plaintiff: Lionking International (U) Ltd; Defendant: Uganda Revenue Authority
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-OS 4 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Ruling
Outcome
application struck out and dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Procedure, Limitation Periods, Originating Summons Vs Notice of Motion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Judicial Review Procedure Limitation Periods Originating Summons Vs Notice of Motion

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lionking International (U) Ltd

Plaintiff

Uganda Revenue Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the application for judicial review was properly brought by originating summons instead of notice of motion.
  2. 2 Whether the application was filed within the statutory limitation period for judicial review.
  3. 3 Whether failure to serve the statement with the application rendered the application fatally defective.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for judicial review was fatally defective for two reasons: first, it was commenced by originating summons instead of by notice of motion as required by Rule 6 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009; second, it was filed outside the three-month limitation period prescribed by Rule 5 of the same Rules, with no good reason advanced for extension. The procedural requirements for judicial review are substantive and not merely technical, and strict compliance is mandatory. The applicant's concession regarding late service of the statement and failure to comply with the prescribed procedure rendered the application incurably defective. As a result, the application was...

Court Disposition

application struck out and dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is struck out and dismissed with costs to the respondent.