TOPIC 5.

TRIAL AND PRE-TRAL PROCEDURE

KAVULE INVESTMENTS and ANOR v TROPICAL AFRICA BANK
This application was brought by Notice of Motion under Section 98 of the
Civil Procedure Act, Order 23 (1), Order 36 Rule 11 and Order 52 Rules 1 &
3 of the Civil Procedure Rules for orders that:
1. The Order dismissing High Court Misc. Application No. 1033 of 2019 be
set aside and the said application be reinstated, heard and determined on
merit.
2. The judgment in Civil Suit No. 815 of 2019 be set aside and any execution
of the said decree be stayed.
The grounds of the application as set out in the Notice of Motion are;
The Applicants were prevented by sufficient cause from entering
appearance in Court when M.A No. 1033 of 2019 was called for hearing.
The applicants contend that they never got to know of any matter pending
in court as the cause list never showed any hearing was coming up.
The application No. 1033 of 2019 was dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 of
the CPR for non-appearance of the Applicants when the matter was called
for hearing. The Applicant seeks to move this Court under Order 9 Rule 23
of the CPR to set aside the dismissal and have the application reinstated
and heard on its merits.
ISSUE; Whether the application discloses any grounds for setting
aside dismissal of M.A No. 1033 of 2019, setting aside the default
judgment in Civil Suit No. 815 of 2019 and reinstatement of the
dismissed application.
Order 9 Rule 23 CPR provides –
Where a suit is wholly or partly dismissed under Rule 22 of this Order, the
plaintiff shall be precluded from bringing a fresh suit in respect of the same
cause of action. But he or she may apply for an order to set the dismissal
aside, and, if he or she satisfies the court that there was sufficient
cause for nonappearance when the suit was called on for hearing, the
court shall make an order setting aside the dismissal, upon such terms as to
costs or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding
with the suit.
sufficient cause has been a subject of court decisions in a number of
decided cases. In the case of Kyobe Senyange vs Naks Ltd [1980] HCB
31, it was stated that for sufficient cause to be disclosed, the court should
be satisfied not only that the applicant had a reasonable excuse for
failing to appear but also that there is merit in his/her defence to the
case.
Counsel for the respondents raised Lack of notification and non-cause
listing of the matter; as sufficient cause. Court found that the evidence
submitted by counsel for the plaintiff was sufficient and went on to
determine whether the applicants had a valid defence before setting aside
the dismissal, court found that indeed the Applicants had proved both and
went ahead to grant orders setting aside the dismissal of the suit and
reinstating the same for hearing on the merits.
ORDER 9 R 11 SUBRULE 1
TOPIC FIVE; PART B. CLOSURES OF PEADINGS AND SUMMONS
FOR DIRECTIONS.
ABATEMENT OF SUITS.
HENRY KIPTALAM BARNGETUNY v STANLEY A. NGETICH
1. The application was filed by Joseph Kimeli Talam who holds a grant of
letters of administration ad litem for the estate of Henry Kiptalam
Barngetuny (deceased) who is the original plaintiff. The applicant is
seeking orders that :-
(a) This suit be revived.
The application is founded on the grounds inter alia that the plaintiff died
on 29/4/2010; that the plaintiff’s legal representative is desirous of
proceeding with this suit; and that the applicant was prevented by sufficient
cause from proceeding with substitution within one year.
The application is supported by a brief affidavit sworn by the applicant,
deponing that the original plaintiff died on 29 April 2010 and that he
obtained a grant of letters of administration ad litem on 28 March 2012.
He has deponed that the delay in processing and obtaining the grant was
due to circumstances beyond his control due to financial constraints. He has
stated that by the time the grant was obtained, the suit had abated and that
it is in the interests of justice if the suit was revived for it to be heard and
determined.
Counsel for the respondent argued that Order 24 rule 3(1)(subrule 1
provides for substitution of plaintiff or defendant if either of them dies)
Order 24 rule 3(2) of the Uganda CPR provides that an application for
substitution must be made within one year of death or else the suit abates.
Provided the court may, for good reason on application, extend the
time.
Court in resolving the issue relied on Rule 7 (1) Where a suit abates or
is dismissed under this Order, no fresh suit shall be brought on the same
cause of action.
(2) The plaintiff or the person claiming to be the legal representative of a
deceased plaintiff or the trustee or official receiver in the case of a bankrupt
plaintiff may apply for an order to revive a suit which has abated or to set
aside an order of dismissal; and, if it is proved that he was prevented by any
sufficient cause from continuing the suit, the court shall revive the suit or
set aside such dismissal upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as it
thinks fit.
Court stated that sufficient cause must be supported by cogent evidence. If
the delay in filing an application for the grant ad litem was due to “financial
constraints”, the delay of more than one year after receiving the grant ad
litem has not been explained at all. No attempt whatsoever has been made
to provide a reason for this delay. I am afraid that since no reason has been
offered, no sufficient cause for this delay has been demonstrated.
I have already held that the applicant has not demonstrated sufficient
reason to enable me revive the abated suit, and given the totality of the
circumstances surrounding this case. This application must therefore fail
and I dismiss the same with costs. This suit shall now be formally marked as
abated.
ISSUE AND SERVICE OF HEARING NOTICES, THE RATIONALE,
PROOF OF SERVICE.
ORIENT BANK LIMITED v AVI ENTERPRISES LIMITED.
This is an appeal commenced under section 62 (1), rule 3 (1) of the
Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeals and References) Regulations and
section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act from the taxation decision of the
registrar made against the Appellant. It is for orders that the taxation
decision is set aside and that the learned registrar erred in law when he
totally disregarded the preliminary objection raised by the applicant. It is
contended that the taxed costs awarded the Respondent of Uganda shillings
80,611,000/= is grossly excessive and in total disregard of the Advocates
(Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations.
Issue 1; Whether the appeal is properly before the court?
The first point of objection raised by the Respondents Counsel is that the
chamber summons by which the appeal was commenced in this court had
expired.
It is therefore my finding that the chamber summons had indeed expired by
the time it was served. It was served outside the period prescribed by the
express provisions of Order 5 rule 1 (2) and (3) of the Civil Procedure
Rules.
Appeal dismissed.
EDOSON KANYABWERA v PASTORI TUMWEBAZE.
The appellant, Edison Kanyabwera, sued the respondent, Pastori
Tumwebaze, in the High Court for damages in negligence arising from a
road traffic accident in which the respective motor vehicles of the two
parties were involved and damaged.
The learned trial judge passed judgement for the plaintiff, because he
believed that service of hearing notices on defendants had been effective
and as such went on to make an ex-parte judgement n favour of the plaintiff.
The defendant then filed an application in the High Court under Order 9
Rue 24 seeking to set aside the ex-parte judgement alleging a non-service of
the hearing notice of the suit. Lugayizi J however was satisfied that service
of the hearing notices ha been effective and therefore dismissed the appeal.
An appeal was made to the Court of Appeal and , the Court of Appeal found
that Kabyesiza & Co, Advocates, who had instructions to represent the
defendant in the case was served with the hearing notice as his duly
appointed agent. Service on them on behalf of the defendant was proper
and effective.
Had the learned Justices of Appeal properly reevaluated the evidence, they
would have reached the conclusion that the defendant or his counsel was
not served at all with the hearing notice of the suit. On 10.11.98 when the
suit was called for hearing
And therefore, this Appeal.
ISSUE; whether or, not the service of hearing notice on the counsel
for the defendant was effective.
Court observed that; Had the learned Justices of Appeal properly
reevaluated the evidence, they would have reached the conclusion that the
defendant or his counsel was not served at all with the hearing notice of the
suit. On 10.11.98 when the suit was called for hearing
The Court record does not show the returned document of service to trial
judge, including the affidavit of service, which he apparently had in his
possession. The learned trial judge merely recorded that he was satisfied
that the defendants advocates were served. The record does not show that
the learned trial judge had a sight of the returned documents, and the
affidavit of service.
There was no affidavit of service on the record and the absence of such
affidavit leads inevitably to the conclusion that the defendant was not
properly served with the hearing notice before the suit was heard in his
absence.
In the result I would allow this appeal with costs here and in the Court of
Appeal. Costs in the High Court should abide the result of the trial.
I would set aside the order and judgment of the Court of Appeal and restore
the order of the High Court setting aside the judgment of Lugayizi, J., and
order that the suit which gave rise to this appeal should be tried de novo by
the High Court on a date notified to both parties.
NATIONAL ENTERPRISES CORPORATION V MUKISA FOODS
c. Mediation
SOLOMON BAGANJA v HENLEY PROPERTIES LIMITED.
The Plaintiffs initially filed this action by way of a specially endorsed plaint
by summary procedure under Order 36 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
for recovery of US$26,000, general damages, interests and costs of the suit.

There was no agreement on the question of costs as well general damages

claimed in the summary suit. An order was issued for the payment of
US$26,000 by the Defendant in addition to 1% of the decreed sum as
penalty fees. Furthermore the applicant/Defendant was granted conditional
leave to file a defence in respect to the issues remaining of general
damages, interest and costs.

At the hearing of the suit on the remainder of the issues Counsel Edmund
Kyeyune represented the Plaintiff while Counsel Michael Mafabi
represented the Defendant. In the joint scheduling memorandum the
following facts are the agreed facts of the dispute namely:

1. The Plaintiffs made a booking/deposit on purchase price for Mall

space (shop unit number 112 and 113 in respect of the Defendants
Mall which was yet to be constructed its plots 60, 63, 64 and 66
Nakivubo road, Kampala.
 1. The Plaintiff made a deposit payment of US$26,000 in respect of the
said units.

1. Due to unforeseen delays in commencement of construction and

delivery of the project, the Plaintiffs sought a refund of the sum
deposited.

1. The Defendant informed the Plaintiffs that the refund of the sum of
US$26,000 including a penalty fee of US$260 would be paid to them
by 29 February 2012 at very latest.

1. The Plaintiffs filed civil suit number 47 of 2012 on 7 February 2012

before the refund was made.

1. The sum of US$26,260 was refunded to the Plaintiffs.

The agreed issue is whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to general

damages, interest and costs of the suit?

The first Plaintiff testified on behalf of the Plaintiffs while Mr Richard

Mubiru, a director of the Defendant testified on behalf of the Defendant.
Thereafter the court was addressed in written submissions.

SETTING DOWN SUIT FOR HEARING.

Constitution requires a speedy trial, fair before an impartial court
Rule 3 Mediation.
"mediation" means the process by which a neutral third person facilitates
communication between
parties to a dispute and assists them in reaching a mutually agreed
resolution of the dispute;
Less participation of lawyers, as it restricts them from "showcasing" their
skill and being involved.
Mediation when undertaken is based on cases summaries, these indicate
parties, who has authority to settle, documentation to be relied upon,
negotiator, see judicature mediation rules; Rule 5.
RULE 5. Case summary
(1) A party to a civil action shall file a case summary.
(2) The case summary shall be filed with the court at the time of filing
pleadings
(3) A case summary shall include the following—
(a) the names of the parties;
(b) the address of the parties including postal, fax, telephone and email
addresses;
(c) the facts giving rise to the civil action and the defence to the facts;
(d) the name and address of the advocate of the party, if any;
(e) the person with full authority to sign a settlement;
(f) the name of the person who will be the lead negotiator for the party;
(g) the name of the proposed mediator, if any; and
(h) the documents that the parties intend to rely on at the mediation.
(4) The court shall ensure that all parties comply with subrule (3).
There are cases where one can and can't mediate, there are expenses
involved. Mediation agreement becomes a judgment

Causelist-court schedule sometimes in agreement with court, or counsel.

PURPOSE
Inform/notify public about court sessions.

ORder17r 1 subrule 2b
ORDER XVII—PROSECUTION OF SUITS AND ADJOURNMENTS.
1. Court may grant time, adjourn hearing and make an order with respect to
costs of adjournment.
Where the hearing of the suit has been adjourned generally, either party may have liberty to
apply to the court to restore the case to the list.

PRE-TRIAL PROCEURE.
As parties are preparing themselves for hearing first step is;
1st. Mediation.
2nd. Scheduling. To put in programme or plan to do.
In 2019 the Civil Procedure Rules were amended to include Order 11A
which added a process called summons for directions.
Summons FD is a first post-closure process that must be undertaken, it is
undertaken for purposes of preparing actions for which that order applies
for hearing. The order applies to actions brought by plaint. although there
are some that are exempted by this order(even though also brought by
plaint)

The burden is placed on the plaintiff to take out summons for directions w/i
the 28-day time limit, provided in Order 11A rule 1(2).
RATIONALE; 28ays and why burden lies on Plaintiff. To burden the one who
brought the application to prepare for the trial
Order 11 A rule 1(6), if summons are not taken w/i the time required, the
suit abates.

Summons for directions, like court saying.. come I give you directions so we
can have a speedy trial.

The court is sort of obliged to ensure the trial is carried on smoothly and
effectively.
1. SUMMONS FOR DIRECTIONS.

2.SCHEDULING CONFERENCE.
Facts that are not agreed usually give rise to the issues, and these are what
the parties wish the court to resolve.
Parties share or state the documents that they wish to rely on, e.g letters
btn P and D, talking about the documents, repective facts from each side,
agreed facts between the parties, contested facts, documents intended to be
relied on by the respective parties, witnesses expected to be called by the
respective parties, how the witness will avail their evidence, either through
witness statements or orally, whether the case has any possibility of
amicable resolution, whether experts will be required, whether interpreters
will be required and so on. (THIS WILL BE CONTAINED IN THE JOINT
SCHEDULING MEMORANDUM)

ORDER 11 A RULE 8
sfd SHALL be complied with w/i 45 days from.. and thereafter, P shall w/i
7days of the last of the compliances, have the suit fixed for trial

TIMELINES FOR A MATTER TO BE PROGRESSING.

plaint filed on 1 jan 2023
Summons signed on same day and served.
Defendant on 15 Jan filed a defence
Response is filed
By end of Jan pleadings are closed.
within 28days(at end of feb), summons for directions are taken out.
By the end of March, there's been compliance with these summons
And now we have a joint scheduling conference.
By 7 or 8 of April, Plaintiff already has a date before the judge.

DETOUR TO RULE 15.

FRAMING OF ISSUES.

O6r28
see order18r5A. witness Statement. to avoid lengthy cross-examination, to
enable speedy trials.
ADJOURNMENTS
Unforeeseable matters, using zoom, witness unable to attend court, and
trial can't proceed w/o hearig witness
litigant needs to seek legal representation, e.g the lawyer left, haven't had
time to engage another lawyer, Article 28, counsel or .. is ill, evidence is
presented, any other cause, court isn't available, i.e., Exceptional, not
sufficient.

Adjournment shall be to the next suitable date, practice directions.

An advocate holding brief for another shall ordinary be expected to proceed
for another.
PROCEDURE FOR APPLYING FOR ADJOURNMENTS IS ORAL.

CONSOLIDATION OF SUITS
this is a process by which actions in which similar matters arise can be
joined so that they can be disposed of in an efficient manner, to ensure that
there'll be a consistent outcome in those matters(To avoid different
decisisons pulling in different directions)

Applications for consolidation are done by chamber summons and are

handled under Order 11 of the CPR

Procedure called a Test suit is related to consolidation, The Test suit is

where cases have been instituted against the same defendant, and similar
matter is in issue but those cases are not brough or joined as they could
have in Order 1 rule 1.
See Order 39 for the specifics
See, the BAT case 3 on Consolidation of Suits.

NOTE; Focus on the basics, can you tell the story, it's merely procedure
focus on the basics.
Qn. Process that a civil dispute must go through before evidence is
challenged in cross-examination.
Answer; Start at closure of proceedings, Mcause listing comes after
New Lecture.
Pre-trial or pre-judgment remedies. When the trial is still ongoing.
Injunctions. An injunction is a remedy granted by court to a deserving
applicant in order to stop another person from doing something, or to stop
that person from doing something.
Courts of judicature have a general power of injunctions as seen in Section
38 of the Judicature Act, and combined with the power on injunctions,
there's a general power of remedies in sEction 33 of the JA.
From a procedural perspective, injunctions are also provided for in the Civil
Procedure Rules, so Order 41 contains/deals with procedure by which this
remedy is sought or can be granted.
Order41r1 and 2, Injunctive relief by way of temporary injunction is limited
to breach of contract and t matters to do wit recovery or protection of
property
Where it's proved that any property is likely to be damaged, court may
grant a temporary injunction to forbid such an act.

There must be a pending suit from the wording of Order 41.

The temporary injunctions are not granted as a matter of right, they are
discretionary. The purpose of the temporary injunction is to maintain the
existing status quo.
Order 41rule 9, Application is by chamber summons supported by affidavit

TEST to BE APPLIED WHEN CONSIDERING TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

1.There must be a pending suit. since application arises out of a main suit.
2.The applicant must show that they have a prima facie case; A case that is
not frivolous, a case that displays that there's something to consider,,
something serious sand not merely wasting court's time. American
Cyanmind on Prima Facie case.
3. The nature of loss the applicant would suffer if the injunction were not
granted would be irreparable, i.e., damages are inadequate. A loss that can
be quantified is not irreparable.
4. Where court is in doubt, it'll consider the application on a Balance of
convenience; i.e., impact on both sides and the effect of granting or not
granting the injunction. Lecturer shares example of the BoyzIIMen show.

Farida Nantale, Hussein Badda, Re; Kakoma Saw Mills, Uganda Super
League v FUFA, someone wishes to stop the league, whose impact would be
massive for the company.

Kiyimba Kaggwa, Giella v Cassman Brown, Simbamanyo et al.

Under the Govt Proceedings Act and the rules thereunder, Injunctions as
remedies are not available against government, however those provisions
must be read in such a way as to conform them to the constitutions
specifically Article 21 dealing with the aspect of equality, AG v Osotraco,
VIVO energy v UNRA. The argument of Public Rights v Private Rights, can
be subject to the fact that the Constitution is supreme.

INTERIM ORDERS.
TEST
1.the same rationale for temporary injunctions applies to why interim
orders are sought. For interim orders to be granted, one must show that
there's a pending appliation for a temporary injunction.
2Interim Orders are sought normally because there's such an urgency for
them that if they are not granted immediately, the pending application will
become useless to the persn
Using the example of the concert, say it's on a saturday. you need it on
Friday, these used to be granted on an ex-parte basis but were quite
commonly abused. The 2019 reforms amended and still permit ex parte
application for exceptional circumstances, but this however is the exception
as they need to be sough inter parties, can be applied for orally given
urgeny, but can be done by Notice of Motion and doesn't exceed 3 days.
Order50rule 3A.
There are injunctions that are obtained in matters to do with mortgages,
under Mortgage Act and reguations, sale of mortgaged property can be
stopped, if this is to be so, these injunctions require applicant to deposit
30% of the value. Ganafa v DFCU.

Main Suit-Miscellaneous Applicatin-miscellaneous Application.

NEW LECTURE.
CONTINUATION OF PRE-TRIAL REMEDIES.
ARREST AND ATTACHMENT BEFORE JUDGMENT.
This pre-trial remedy is available to a plaintiff who in the course of an action
against a defendant or defendants discovers and can satisfy the court that
the defendant is either about to leave the jurisdiction or is acting in relation
to his property (defendant's) in a manner intended to either delay or
obstruct execution. example is a case going on and with the way the case is
going on, th defendant deposits assets e.g., bank accounts outside the
Jurisdiction. order 40 provides for this.

The Specific application is by way of chamber summons supported by an

affidavit.
Defendant can avoid being arrested if order is made, by providing security
determined by court, this can be in the form of cash, guarantees or bonds or
property itself.
The attachment is done with the orders of the court.
mugimu

SECURITY FOR COSTS

Litigation is expensive, and a costly venture and inevitably at the end of
litigation, one party may be ordered to pay the costs that have been
incurred by the other party, That can only be determined at the end of the
litigation, however, there are instance where a defendant might be
apprehensive about the ability of the plaitiff to pay the cossts of litigation if
the defendant were to win the case. Order 26 provides for this order 26r1
provides that court may, if it deems fit may order a plaintiff in any suit to
give security for paymenet for all costs incurred by any defendant.
Application is by chamber summons supported by affidavit under O26r2 sub
rule 1. If the security ordered isn't given, the court shall make an order
dismissing the suit unless court permits plaintiff to withdraw the suit.

At Appeal.
On appeal there's a mandatory sum that's required to be paid. Court of
Appeal And supreme court rule, there's a provision under which a
respondent can apply to court to apply for further sum for security of costs.

The 5-part test in GM Combined sometimes condensed into 3.(kabaka v

Male Mabirizi).

EXPLAIN PRE-TRIAL REMEDIES IN UGANDA

JUDGEMENTS ORDERS A..

Every civil litigation is expected to culminate into a judgment, all the steps
and process are to crystallize into a judgment.
Section25 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the court shall, after the
case has been heard pronounce the judgment. this isn't an opttion, but a
must, the judgment is therefore a statement by the judicial officer of his/her
assessment legal and factual of a dispute, in the process of determining
rights of the parties. and so stemming from s 26, of the CPA, order 21 of the
CPR expounds on the idea around the judgment, Order21rule1 provides that
in suits where a hearing is necessary, the court after the case has been
heard shall pronounce judgment in open court. The judgment must be
signed by the judicial officer and must also be dated. it must be pronounced
immediately upon conclusion of a case, or at some future date, i.e.,
judgment on notice.

A judgment that is written and signed by one judicial officer can be

pronounced by a successor, since it's already been signed, and as such they
can't pronounce a judgment in draft(not yet signed).
The judgment must contain four elements
1-summary of the case i.e., a concise statement about the case. i.e., facts
2-The points for determination, the issues
3-The decision on those points
4-The reasons/ration decidendi.

The judgment is detailed, but the DECREE is an extract of the orders of the
judgement, i.e., judgement entered in favour of Plaintiff, and plaintiff is
ordered to pay, as well as costs. so the decree would extract that.

Extraction of a decree in the high court is the duty of the successful party
who is required to share that decree in draft with the unsuccessful party, if
it's approved it's signed and endorsed. if the other party doesnt approcve,
then court will do so.

In magisrates court extraction of the decree is by the magistrate.

In practice however, the one that wants the decree is the one who initiates
the process, e.g., one that wishes to appeal.

Rulings come from applications and are summarised as orders.

Judgments comes from a main suit, and the summarised version is the
decree

COSTS
Covered in s27 of the CPA and the award of costs is disretionary. Costs are
expenses incurred in litigation, these expenes include lawyers' fees,
disbursements i.e., direct expenses for photocopying, filing et al.
When a court exercises discretion and grants one party costs, if court has
not set the quantum, then quantum must be determined through a process
called taxation of costs. Taxation of costs involves a party to whom these
costs have been awarded, preparing and presenting a bill of costs for
consideration, Th consideration of that bill of costs is what is called taxation
of costs.

Costs are taxed according to scales provided by law this law is called
Advocates (remuneration and taxation of costs) rules Rule9 subrule 2 of the
Supreme Court rules. Costs are discretionary, and judge can decide that a
winning party shall not even be awarded costs.

INTEREST.
remdey, provided for in s 26, disretionary and a court may award it to
increase on the value of the monetary award given to one party. for special
damages, interesr from date of damage.
On General damages interest runs from date of judgments.
See Mukisa Biscuits

POST JUDGMENT REMEDIES

Designed to ensure that what was intended is what is there
although court becones fanctus officio, the court can still ensure that
correct judgment
section 99 CPA
SLIP RULE.
Accidental, clerical or mathematical
this section is re-echoed in the Court of Appeal rules under rule 36 and rule
35 in the supreme court rules.
An exception to the fanctus-officio rule.

this remedy is discretionary and the court on its own motion can then move.
see, FX Mubukke and UBE, Jivraj Kasandas, Incafex(is a supreme court
decision), orient bank, bellex tours
CIRCUMSTANCES TO INVOKE THE SLIP RULE/preconditions
1.Arithmetic or grammatical/accidental error

E.g where they intended to put appellant they put respondent

2.If this ommission had been brougt to court at the time the judgment had
been entered, would the court have corrected it, there would not have been
any doubt that the matter would be corrected?
e'g where the judge makes orders, but in summarizing the arguments
doesn't cite the orders he entered

Not availbale as a disguised appeal. (Zaabwe v Orient Bank)

see, Ahmed Kawooya v Bangu Aggrey-summarises the law on slip rule.
FORUM,
same court
NOTICE OF MOTION, with affidavit including grounds and attach grounds.

REVIEW
Asking court to look again at the decision.
section 82 CPR, a person that considers himsellf/herself aggrieved from a
decions from wc an appeal is allowed, or not allowed may apply for a revie
to the court which passed the judgment.

instances, either no appeal is allowed, or it's allowed but hasn't been

lodged.
Section 82
Order 46 CPR. gives flesh to the idea around review.
Order 46r1 expounds what can happen in those instances.
46 1 subrule b
1. there is new and important information or mark of evidence which
although the person was diligent, they could not have taken to court at the
time.
2.There was some mistake or error which is apparent on the face of the
record.
3.There is a broad ground for any other sufficient reason.

You don't have to have been aparty to the suit, and so a person that was not
a party but they are aggrieved can exercise the remedy of review.
Therefore first consider whether this person is aggrieved, and once this is
passed you can proceed.
Kateregga v Commissioner for land registration.
Yusuf v Nokrach
Busoga Growers Cooperative Union
Nsamba and sons Limited.
Maurice Ogwal and ors v AG
see also FX Mubukke v UEB

BASIS, allowed to appeal and havent appealed or appeal not allowed

Under s67 CPA, the provisions on the right to appeal

Section 67(2) no appeal allowed in a consent judgment

Section 66, Appeals only lie from decrees of HC and COA.
Since the right of appeal is only granted by law.

When there's new information which one could not have been aware of and
therefore wasn't able to bring this information to the court.
Ladak Hussein v Isingoma, that a non-party can also apply for review. e.g
people contesting over land you partly own
Under the second instance on error or mistake apparent , it should not
relate to reasoning of court in arriving at its decision.
Kwesigabo Bamwine and Walubiri v NYTIL, ask court to review and correct
error.

E.g interest accrues from date of judgment. and so where court awards
interest from date of damages, and yet it is on damages and these can't
have interest awarded retrospectively

THIRD, any other sufficient reason.

Although this appears that anything can fall under this, it is understood to
mean a cause that is analogous or similar, see;
Nakivubo Chemists
Any other sufficient reason doesn't mean open the door.
as said earlier, Consent judgments cannot be appealed.
See Maurice Ogwal v AG
PROCEDURE
Order 46r8
Applications are by NOM supported by Affidavit.

Since this is a post-judgement remedy, execution might ensue and as such

one must apply for a stay of execution or interim order.

Rule 3 Order 46.

REVISION.
at distinguished from Review and slip rule which are before the same court.
Revision, Is by the High Court and therefore it is a remedy exercised with
regard to the lower court decision.

Section 83 provides that HC may call for any record determined any
Magistrate Court, and if HC considers any of these,
Revision is invoked where court
-exercised jurisdiction it doesn't have in law, say a piece of land worth 100
million in the Magistrates court
-Court has jurisdiction, but has failed or hasnt exercised it's jursidiction,
-or the lower court has jurisdiction but has exercised it illegally or
manifestly unjust, e.g., ordering Corporal Punishment. e.g., ordering
demolition of a house when no one has asked it

or by Notice of Motion.. Just a letter to registrar of the court, stating

grounds, and so no formal process, HC can call for the file

RECAP EMANATING FROM DERRICK'S QUESTION.

Last sem dealt with pre-liminary things
THIS SEM
relating to hearing the case, after case is prepared for hearing, what
happens after hearing, i.e., types of judgments, setting aside, trying
applications, affidavits as evidence used, extracting decrees to execution.
Post trial remedies, post judgment-appeal,

CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION.

aRTICLE 137
aRTICLE137(3)

-DECLARATIONSAND OTHER REDRESS.

that an act or omission is inconsistent with the constitution.
Ismail Serugo, Rwanyarare, Tinyefuza-Controversy surrounding a cause of
action

COnstitutional Petitions and references rules

You seize the court ib two ways

-petition, file a petition, this is supported by an affidavit
-reference, 137(5), Here what you're taking before the court is a question
for interpretation.
-There are stringet rules on structure of petition under rule 3
-Petition is filed in the registry in 8 copies(in practice it is 9)
-Attracts filing fees
-and it is required that security for costs are deposited at time of petition
being lodged
-Must be served on Aany other respondents and even if AG is not a
respondent, the AG must be served.

-The respondent after being served must file an address of service w/i three
days
-From the date they are served they must file an answer to the petition w/i 7
days

-petition and answer are all supported by an affidavit.

Time and the place of trial is fixed by the court and ordinarily the trial will
follow a scheduling conference.
The trial is in open court and is before at least five justices.

Under the Constn and the Constnal petition rules, the expectation is that a
constitutional petition matter will be heard expeditiously and to facilitate
that all other business of the Court of Appeal and the hearings can take
place on Public holidays and weekends.
article 137(7) and rule10

Rule 18 until22 deals with refences, and thers's a format in the schedule to
these rules

Quetion for determination is forwarded to the court and the refence is sent
to the constitutional Court, the court then serves all parties concerned and
then gives notices for directions, so parties can prepare to come and
address qns at hearing

The principles of constitutional hearing are many but they are well settled;
-Cause of action if it specifies act or provision and the provision of the
constitution it allegedly violates. look at the cases

-Consistency of the constitution, Interpret in a way that creates harmony,

ii.e., not interpret provisions of the Constitution in isolation of others.
Semogerere, Charles Onyango-Obbo, i.e., purpose and effect, publication of
false news, Mulenga JSC, the offence was so ambiguous and as such could
not pass the test of being constitutional
Sharon Dimanche.
Uganda Law Society v Attorney General 52 of 2017
All these are principles they are endless. Constnal is the supreme law,
paramountcy,

PURPOSE AND EFFECT.

where

Judicial Review
Prerogative remedies, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition.
JURISDICTION
High Court
WHEN 90DAYS
WHETHER YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT INTEREST
COMMENCED BY notice of motin supported by afidaviit

MANDAMUS, calling upon public body to exercise a duty, e.g., availing a

passport
CERTIORARI-Quashing order.

3. It is about the decision making process and not the decision.

Article 42 requires fairness, and allows for redress.