[2009] UGHC 184

[2009] UGHC 184

The court held that the applicants failed to demonstrate any specific error of law, procedural defect, or failure to determine a material issue of law in the High Court's decision as required for a second appeal under Section 72 of the Civil Procedure Act. The application merely alleged the existence of arguable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UGHC 184
Parties
Applicant: Nelson Onyango & 7 Others; Respondent: Stewards of Gospel Talents Ltd
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CV-MA-0427-2009
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Second Appeals, Discretion of Court, Setting Aside Dismissal, Appealable Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Second Appeals Discretion of Court Setting Aside Dismissal Appealable Orders

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nelson Onyango & 7 Others

Applicant

Stewards of Gospel Talents Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated grounds for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal from the High Court decision as required for a second appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the impugned order is appealable as of right or requires leave under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the application discloses any substantial question of law or procedural defect warranting a second appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants failed to demonstrate any specific error of law, procedural defect, or failure to determine a material issue of law in the High Court's decision as required for a second appeal under Section 72 of the Civil Procedure Act. The application merely alleged the existence of arguable grounds without substantiating them or indicating any substantial question of law. The court emphasized that not every adverse decision warrants a second appeal and that the applicants' interest in appealing as a matter of course is insufficient. The court further found that the impugned order was not appealable as of right under the Civil Procedure Rules, and that the applicants...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • This ruling shall in the judge's absence be delivered by the learned Deputy Registrar of the Division.