[2022] UGHCLD 95
The court found that since the dismissal of Civil Suit No. 67 of 2014 was made under O.17 r.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the law is settled that such a suit cannot be reinstated. The only recourse for the plaintiff is to file a fresh suit, subject to the law of limitation. The application to set aside the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] UGHCLD 95
- Parties
- Applicant: Joshua Ogwal; Respondent: Akright Projects Ltd; Respondent: Anatoli Kamugisha
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Civil Suit No. 893 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- Kawesa, J
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal of Suit, Reinstatement of Suit, Limitation Periods, Ex Parte Proceedings
- 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
Joshua Ogwal
Applicant
Akright Projects Ltd
Respondent
Anatoli Kamugisha
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal order issued under O.9 r.17 and O.17 r.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules can be set aside and the suit reinstated.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to reinstatement of Civil Suit No. 67 of 2014.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the dismissal of Civil Suit No. 67 of 2014 was made under O.17 r.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the law is settled that such a suit cannot be reinstated. The only recourse for the plaintiff is to file a fresh suit, subject to the law of limitation. The application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit was therefore dismissed summarily. The absence of a response from the respondents did not affect the legal position, as the rules are clear and binding on the court. No costs were awarded.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate Civil Suit No. 67 of 2014 is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
#### **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**
## **[LAND DIVISION]**
#### **MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.893 OF 2021**
**(ARISING FROM CIVIL SUIT NO. 67 OF 2014)**
**JOSHUA OGWAL::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::APPLICANT**
#### **VERSUS**
### **1. AKRIGHT PROJECTS LTD**
**2. ANATOLI KAMUGISHA :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::RESPONDENTS**
#### **RULING**
## BEFORE: **HON MR. JUSTICE HENRY I. KAWESA**
This application was brought by notice of motion under **Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71; Section 33 of the Judicature Act Cap. 13; O.9 r. 18, O.52 r.1,2, & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules S. I 71-1.**
The application seeks orders that:
1. The dismissal order issued by this Honourable Court on 18th February, 2021 with respect to High Court Civil Suit *No.67*
## *of 2014: Joshua Ogwal versus Akright Projects Ltd & Anor*
be set aside and the suit reinstated and heard on merit.
2. Costs of this application be in the cause.
The grounds of the application are supported by the affidavit of M/s. Martin Kakuru of M/s Ligomarc Advocates.
There is an affidavit of service on record indicating that the respondent was served the application and submissions of the applicant. However, the respondent did not file a reply. Accordingly, this Court shall proceed to determine the application *ex parte*.
## **Summary Resolution**
I have noticed that the order dismissing Civil Suit No.67 of 2014 was made under **O.9 r.17 and O.17 r.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1**.
As regards the latter Order and Rule, it is trite that a suit dismissed thereunder cannot be reinstated, but the Plaintiff may, subject to the law of limitation, file a fresh suit (*Kibugumu* **MA NO. 893-2021-JOSHUA OGWAL VS. AKRGHT PROJECTS LTD & ANOR. (RULING)**
# *Patrick versus Aisha Mulungi & Anor H. C. M. A No.455 of 2014; Cimtel Integrators Africa Ltd versus NSSF HCMA No.772 of 2016***).**
Since the suit was dismissed partly under **O.17 r.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules**, I find that it cannot be reinstated. The application is, therefore, hereby dismissed summarily.
No costs awarded.
……………………………
Henry I. Kawesa
## **JUDGE**
15/03/22