[2022] UGCA 360
The Court of Appeal held that the appeal was incompetent because the appellant failed to seek and obtain leave from the High Court to appeal against the order for security for costs. Rule 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules expressly requires leave for such appeals, and the record showed no evidence that leave had been...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] UGCA 360
- Parties
- Appellant: Uganda Muslim Supreme Council; Respondent: The Board of Governors Rwenzori Saad Islamic Institute
- Court
- Court of Appeal of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal No 96 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal Struck Out
- Outcome
- appeal_struck_out
- Judges
- Kakuru, JA, Kibeedi, JA, Gashirabake, JA
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Security for Costs, Appealability of Orders
- 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
Uganda Muslim Supreme Council
Appellant
The Board of Governors Rwenzori Saad Islamic Institute
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Struck Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal against an order for security for costs is appealable as of right.
- 2 Whether leave to appeal was sought and obtained from the High Court as required.
- 3 Whether failure to obtain leave renders the appeal incompetent.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the appeal was incompetent because the appellant failed to seek and obtain leave from the High Court to appeal against the order for security for costs. Rule 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules expressly requires leave for such appeals, and the record showed no evidence that leave had been sought or granted. The absence of leave deprived the court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, and as such, the appeal was struck out with costs awarded to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal_struck_out
Orders
- The appeal is struck out.
- The appellant shall pay the costs of this appeal to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
60 paragraphs
#### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
#### IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA **AT KAMPALA**
#### CIVIL APPEAL NO 96 OF 2014
#### (ARISING FROM HCT - 01 - CV - LD - MA - 051 OF 2014)
#### (ARISING FROM HCT - 01 - CV - LD - CA - 043 OF 2013)
UGANDA MUSLIM SUPREME COUNCIL--------------------------------APPELLANT
#### **VERSUS**
THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS RWENZORI ---------------RESPONDENT SAAD ISLAMIC INSTITUTE----------------
HON. MR. JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU, J. A. **BEFORE:** HON. MR. JUSTICE MUZAMIRU KIBEDI MUTANGULA, J. A. HON. MR. JUSTICE CHRISTOPHER GASHIRABAKE, J. A.
#### **DECREE ON APPEAL**
This appeal coming up for hearing this **15<sup>th</sup>** day of **November, 2022** in the presence of Mr. Isaac Kugonza, Counsel for the Appellant and in the presence of **Mr. Richard Bwiruka**, Counsel for the Respondent;
#### IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS;
- 1. **That** the appeal is struck out. - 2. **That** the Appellant shall pay the costs of this appeal to the respondent.
We approve; **Isaac Kugonza Bwiruka Richard Counsel for the Respondent Counsel for the Appellant** DATED at Kampala this .................................... ........, 2022 **REGISTRAR** $\frac{1}{22}$ Extracted by; M/s Kaahwa, Kafuuzi, Bwiruka & Co. Advocates Plot 38 Mugurusi Road P. O. Box 804, Fort Portal.
#### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
# IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA (COA) AT **KAMPALA**
#### CIVIL APPEAL NUMBER 0096 OF 2014
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE:
$\mathbf{z}$
$\mathsf{S}$
$20$
HON. MR. JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU, JA $10$ HON. MR. JUSTICE MUZAMIRU M. KIBEEDI JA HON. MR. JUSTICE CHRISTOPHER GASHIRABAKE, JA
PARTIES:
**UGANDA MUSLIM SUPREME COUNCIL::APPELLANT** $15$
$VS.$
THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS RWENZORI SAAD INSLAMIC INSTITUTE::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::RESPONDENT
Date: 15<sup>TH</sup> NOVEMBER, 2022
$\mathbf{1}$
#### <sup>5</sup> Appearances:
Mr. Isaac Kugonza: Counsel for Appellant
Mr. Richard Bwiruka: Counsel for Respondent
Nanyanga Susan: Court Clerk
Evel5rn Ampiire : Transcriber
If it may please you my lords, my name is Richard Bwiruka and I appear for the respondent. My learned friend Mr. Kugonza <sup>15</sup> Isaac appears for the appellant. The respondent is represented in court by Mr. Hajji Bigidard Saad.
## Mr. Kugonza:
My lords the appellant is equally represented by Mr. Abjiji Kelemire
## <sup>20</sup> Justice
Counsel is this an appeal against an application for security for costs?
Yes my lord.
## Justice Kakuru:
Is it appealable as of right?
## Mr. Kugonzai
<sup>10</sup> No my lord.
## Justice Kakuru:
Did you seek leave at the High Court for leave to appeal against the order that it is not appealable as of right?
## Mr. Kugonrzaz
<sup>15</sup> My lord we a-re freshly instructed in the matter.
## Justice Kakuru:
Did you counsel? Did you seek leave and obtain it from the High Court and if so just show us the order.
## Mr. Kugolnzai
<sup>20</sup> My lord I need to establish whether previous counsel in the matter sought the leave of the High Court.
## <sup>5</sup> Justice Kakuru:
We have all the papers on this file and there is no such.
My lords I would strike out this appeal on account that it is not appealable as of right and no leave was sought at the High Court and no leave has been sought here.
## <sup>10</sup> Justice Kibeedi:
My lord I would agree but there is the question of costs, counsel needs to show cause why counsel should not personally pay the costs.
## <sup>5</sup> Justice Kakuru:
This appeal is hereby struck out for failure by the appellant to seek leave to appeal which is mandatory. The order appealed for is not appealable as of right under Rule 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules with costs to the respondent.
#### HON. JUSTICES OF APPEAL
#### 15TH NOVEMBER 20/22