[2013] UGHCCD 103

[2013] UGHCCD 103

The appeal was dismissed because the trial court properly exercised its discretion in ordering substituted service after reasonable efforts to serve the appellant personally failed. The appellant's arguments that substituted service was ineffective and that the affidavit of service was false were unsupported by evidence. The court found that the appellant did not raise a meritorious defence in the grounds of appeal, and that the reframing of grounds in submissions was contrary to procedural rules. The trial court's decision was not based on a wrong principle of law or misdirection of facts, and there was no justification to interfere with its discretion. The appeal failed on all grounds...

Citation
[2013] UGHCCD 103
Parties
Appellant: Tweheyo Edson; Respondent: Barurengyera Kamusiime Hillary
Court
HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
5 August 2013
Case Number
HCT
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Exparte Judgment, Substituted Service, Setting Aside Judgment, Affidavit of Service, Sale of Land, Right of Audience
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land and Property Exparte Judgment Substituted Service Setting Aside Judgment Affidavit of Service Sale of Land Right of Audience

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tweheyo Edson

Appellant

Barurengyera Kamusiime Hillary

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in law by dismissing the application to set aside the exparte judgment on the ground that counsel for the applicant had refused service on his behalf.
  2. 2 Whether substituted service was necessary and effective given the applicant's whereabouts were allegedly known to the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the affidavit of service was false and whether the lawyers for the plaintiff were diligent in serving the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial court properly exercised its discretion in ordering substituted service after reasonable efforts to serve the appellant personally failed. The appellant's arguments that substituted service was ineffective and that the affidavit of service was false were unsupported by evidence. The court found that the appellant did not raise a meritorious defence in the grounds of appeal, and that the reframing of grounds in submissions was contrary to procedural rules. The trial court's decision was not based on a wrong principle of law or misdirection of facts, and there was no justification to interfere with its discretion. The appeal failed on all grounds...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The ruling and exparte judgment of the lower court remain in force.