[2025] UGHCLD 64
The application was dismissed solely on procedural grounds due to the non-appearance of both parties and their counsel at the hearing. The court relied on Order 19 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which empowers the court to dismiss an application where parties fail to appear. The court found no justification...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] UGHCLD 64
- Parties
- Applicant: Namiro Suzan; Respondent: M/S Bbaale & Partners, Advocates & Legal Consultants
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Misc Cause 382 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Striking Out Applicant and Costs
- Outcome
- application dismissed for non-appearance of parties
- Judges
- Kaahwa, J
- Legal Topics
- Striking Out Party, Costs Award, Non Appearance, Service of Process
- 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
Namiro Suzan
Applicant
M/S Bbaale & Partners, Advocates & Legal Consultants
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Striking Out Applicant and Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be struck out as a party in Civil Suit No.486 of 2025 for lack of instructions to the respondent to file the suit in her name.
- 2 Whether the respondent should bear the costs awarded against the applicant in Civil Suit No.486 of 2020 and Miscellaneous Application No.328 of 2019.
- 3 Whether the application should be dismissed for non-appearance of the parties.
Ratio Decidendi
The application was dismissed solely on procedural grounds due to the non-appearance of both parties and their counsel at the hearing. The court relied on Order 19 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which empowers the court to dismiss an application where parties fail to appear. The court found no justification for the absence, as the respondent's counsel did not specify the case that allegedly caused the scheduling conflict, and the applicant was also absent without explanation. Consequently, the court declined to consider the substantive merits of the application and ordered that each party bear their own costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for non-appearance of parties
Orders
- The application is dismissed for non-appearance of the parties.
- Each party shall bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
## THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA HOLDEN AT KAMPALA (LAND DIVISION) **MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO.382 OF 2023**
NAMIRO SUZAN------------------------------------
## **VERSUS**
## M/S BBAALE & PARTNERS, ADVOCATES & LEGAL CONSULTANTS ------------------ RESPONDENT
**BEFORE: HON. LADY JUSTICE CHRISTINE KAAHWA**
## **RULING**
This application was brought under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, section 33 of the Judicature Act, section 74(1) of the Advocates Act Cap.267, Rule 2(1) of the Advocates Act Cap.267 and Order 52 Rule 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules for orders that;
- 1. The Applicant be struck out as a party in Civil Suit No.486 of 2025 and all applications arising therefrom as the Applicant has never given the Respondent any instructions to commence and/file the Civil Suit in her names. - 2. The costs awarded in Civil Suit No.486 of 2020 and Miscellaneous Application No.328 of 2019 against the Applicant be met by the Respondent. - 3. Costs of the application be provided for.
When this matter came up for hearing the parties and their Counsel were absent.
The Affidavit of Service deposed by Namuddu Ezereth, a Court Process Server shows that she served M/s John F. Ssengooba & Co. Advocates on the 26<sup>th</sup> May 2025. The Hearing Notice was signed by Namugalu Vivian from M/s John F. Ssengooba & Co. Advocates.
On the other hand Counsel for the Respondents M/s Eric-Kiingi & Co. Advocates received the Hearing Notice in protest stating that they would not be able to appear as they were engaged in the Court of Appeal.
I note that the case that was being attended to in the Court of Appeal is not mentioned. I dismiss this application under Order 19 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules for none appearance of the parties. Each party shall bear their own costs.
Dated at Kampala this 29<sup>th</sup> day of **May 2025**.
$k$ **Christine Kaahwa JUDGE**