[2025] UGHCLD 18

[2025] UGHCLD 18

The court found that the 2nd respondent filed the third-party notice on 26th June 2024, whereas leave to issue the notice was granted on 30th May 2024. This exceeded the 15-day period prescribed for filing a defence under Order 8 rule 1(2) and, by extension, for filing a third-party notice under Order 1 rule 14(4),...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] UGHCLD 18
Parties
Applicant: Registered Trustees of Kampala Arch Diocese; Respondent: Muyimba Micheal & 50 Ors t/a Nsambya Market Vendors Association; Respondent: Capital Shoppers Ltd
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 2117 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Third Party Notice and for Leave to File Defence Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed; third-party notice struck out; costs to applicant
Judges
Naluzze Aisha Batala, J
Legal Topics
Third Party Procedure, Extension of Time, Written Statement of Defence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Third Party Procedure Extension of Time Written Statement of Defence

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Registered Trustees of Kampala Arch Diocese

Applicant

Muyimba Micheal & 50 Ors t/a Nsambya Market Vendors Association

Respondent

Capital Shoppers Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Third Party Notice and for Leave to File Defence Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the third-party notice should be struck out for being filed out of time without leave of court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay to warrant leave to file its written statement of defence out of time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 2nd respondent filed the third-party notice on 26th June 2024, whereas leave to issue the notice was granted on 30th May 2024. This exceeded the 15-day period prescribed for filing a defence under Order 8 rule 1(2) and, by extension, for filing a third-party notice under Order 1 rule 14(4), unless otherwise ordered by court. The respondent did not provide any sufficient cause or justification for the delay, nor was there a court order extending the time. The court held that the third-party notice was filed out of time contrary to the Civil Procedure Rules and, therefore, must be struck out. The application succeeded on this ground, and the 2nd respondent was...

Court Disposition

application allowed; third-party notice struck out; costs to applicant

Orders

  • The third-party notice by the 2nd respondent filed on 26th June 2024 is struck out for having been filed out of time.
  • The 2nd respondent shall bear the costs associated with the application.