[2021] UGHCLD 44

[2021] UGHCLD 44

The court found that the entire lower court record, including certified proceedings and judgment, pertained to Civil Suit No. 10 of 2003, not Civil Suit No. 10 of 2006 as alleged by the Applicant. The Applicant failed to produce any certified record for Civil Suit No. 10 of 2006, and the evidence showed he had...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] UGHCLD 44
Parties
Applicant: Ssemakula Stephen; Respondent: Kibuuka Herbert
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Revision 15 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Revision / Ruling
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
Kazaarwe, J
Legal Topics
Revision of Lower Court Decision, Jurisdiction of Magistrate Courts, Abuse of Court Process, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Revision of Lower Court Decision Jurisdiction of Magistrate Courts Abuse of Court Process Land Disputes

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ssemakula Stephen

Applicant

Kibuuka Herbert

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Revision / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the Grade One Magistrate Court at Mwanga II Road exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law.
  2. 2 Whether the lower court acted illegally or with material irregularity causing injustice to the Applicant.
  3. 3 Whether there is a distinct Civil Suit No. 10 of 2006 separate from Civil Suit No. 10 of 2003.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the entire lower court record, including certified proceedings and judgment, pertained to Civil Suit No. 10 of 2003, not Civil Suit No. 10 of 2006 as alleged by the Applicant. The Applicant failed to produce any certified record for Civil Suit No. 10 of 2006, and the evidence showed he had previously appealed the decision in Civil Suit No. 10 of 2003 and sought a stay of execution, which was denied. The court concluded that the Applicant's claims regarding the existence of a separate suit and lack of access to the record were false and intended to mislead the court. The application for revision was therefore an abuse of court process, built on deceit, and was...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for revision is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
  • The Registrar is directed to take steps to investigate any illegalities on the court record.