|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| September 2021 |
|
|
An interlocutory ex parte order is not subject to revision; the proper remedy is an application to set it aside.
Civil procedure – Revision – interlocutory and ex parte orders – Section 79(2) Civil Procedure Code – Revision not competent against interlocutory order; remedy is application to set aside ex parte decision; jurisdictional objection to be raised after setting aside interlocutory order or on appeal.
|
24 September 2021 |
|
Revision against an interlocutory ex parte ward tribunal order is incompetent; remedy is to set aside the ex parte order.
Revision - Competency of revision applications against interlocutory/ex parte orders; Ex parte orders - remedy is setting aside, not revision; Civil Procedure Code s.79(2) - bar on revision of interlocutory decisions; Jurisdiction - may be raised anytime but proper procedural steps required; Natural justice - allegations of being condemned unheard cannot bypass interlocutory-procedure rules.
|
24 September 2021 |
|
Application to withdraw and re-file to join parties denied for lack of formal defect or sufficient grounds.
Civil procedure — Withdrawal of suit — Order XXIII Rule 1(1),(2),(3) CPC — withdrawal with liberty to re-file requires a formal defect or other sufficient grounds — prior leave to amend not utilized — abuse of process — principle of finality in litigation — joinder of parties — costs.
|
24 September 2021 |
|
Court granted extension to file a notice of appeal, finding the delay technical and the application timely after a struck-out appeal.
Extension of time – discretion to grant extension – factors: length of delay, reasons, prejudice, prospects of success; Procedural default – Court of Appeal Rules 2009 Rule 90(1) & (2) – requirement to include service evidence of request for certified records; Computation of time – time reckoned from striking out of prior appeal; Applicability of overriding objective where delay is technical.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Applicant’s Bill of Costs was timely because time ran from the correcting Registrar’s refile order, not the earlier order.
Civil procedure – taxation of costs – computation of time for filing a Bill of Costs – time runs from correcting Registrar order granting leave to refile, not from earlier complied-with order – wrongful dismissal for being time-barred.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Illegality apparent on the face of the record (jurisdictional defect) can justify extending time for the applicant to appeal.
Land law — extension of time to appeal — judicial discretion — illegality as sufficient cause — jurisdictional defect apparent on the face of the record — Ward Tribunal pecuniary limits.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Failure to prove improper service or raise new grounds below defeats extension to set aside ex parte judgment.
Land law – ex parte judgment – extension of time to set aside – service by substitution (affixation) and publication – raising new grounds on appeal – requirement for documentary proof of absence abroad – Land Disputes Courts Regulations 2003 Reg.19(1).
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Court expunged submissions filed by an advocate without a valid practising certificate but preserved preliminary objections to be reargued; costs awarded to plaintiff.
Land law – preliminary objections – time limitation and cause of action; non-joinder of necessary parties; adequacy of land description; advocacy rules – validity of written submissions filed by advocate without valid practising certificate; procedural effect of grace period on filings.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
An appeal struck out as time-barred bars returning to the same court later to seek an extension of time.
Civil procedure – extension of time – appeal struck out as time-barred – finality of orders – party precluded from returning to same court to seek extension after conclusive time-bar determination; reliance on Court of Appeal authority (MM Worldwide; East Africa Development Bank; Olam Uganda).
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Res judicata bars relitigation of the ownership dispute; the suit challenging land certification was struck out as incompetent.
Land law — ownership dispute; res judicata — prior Tribunal and High Court determinations bar relitigation; preliminary objections — incompetence and striking out.
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Application to set aside dismissal struck out for citing wrong provision; leave to refile granted within 21 days.
Civil procedure – incorrect citation of statutory provisions – wrong or non-citation renders application incompetent and court not properly moved. Civil procedure – setting aside dismissal for non-appearance – applicant must invoke correct provision and show sufficient cause. Relief – incompetent application struck out with leave to refile; no order as to costs.
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Failure to describe unsurveyed land sufficiently under Order VII r.3 renders the suit incompetent and struck out with leave to refile.
Civil procedure — Order VII r.3 CPC — description of immovable property — unsurveyed land requires particularity (boundaries/size) to render decree executable; preliminary objection — insufficiency of plaint — suit struck out with leave to refile; service requirements under s.106 Local Government (Urban Authorities) Act (raised but not determined).
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Court refused extension to set aside ex parte judgment for unexplained ten-year delay and effective substituted service.
Civil procedure – Extension of time – Section 14(1) Law of Limitation Act and Order IX Rule 13 CPC – applicant must account for each day of delay and show sufficient cause. Service – substituted service by publication – publication in Uhuru Newspaper raises presumption of awareness. Illegality – point of law must be apparent on the face of the record to justify extension of time. Application to set aside ex parte judgment – cannot succeed where extension of time is refused.
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Extension of time to set aside ex parte judgment refused for unexplained delay and valid substituted service.
Civil procedure – extension of time – applicant must disclose sufficient cause and account for each day of delay. Service – substituted service by publication raises presumption of knowledge. Illegality – must be apparent on the face of the record and of sufficient importance to justify extension. Omnibus applications – combining extension and setting aside ex parte judgment is permissible when related.
|
22 September 2021 |
|
Appellate court upholds lower tribunals: signed transfer document and locus in quo evidence proved land transfer; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – proof of transfer of occupancy/plot – signed transfer document and witness evidence – locus in quo findings – limits on second appellate interference with factual findings.
|
21 September 2021 |
|
The applicants' village land allocation was void for lack of village assembly quorum; the respondent proved ownership of two acres.
Village land — allocation must be approved by properly constituted village assembly — quorum requirement; invalid allocation is null and void; burden of proof in civil claims; proof on balance of probabilities of family possession entitling respondent to two-acre interest and peaceful possession.
|
21 September 2021 |
|
Land Tribunal erred by nullifying a property transfer while a Primary Court matrimonial claim over the property remained pending.
Land law — transfer of property — whether Land Tribunal may nullify transfer where matrimonial proceedings are pending in a competent court. Jurisdiction — competence of Land Tribunal vis-à-vis Primary Court to determine matrimonial property. Evidence — use of documents and contested evidence (exhibit D1) where related matrimonial cause is pending. Civil procedure — necessity to decide all framed issues; reliefs granted must correspond to prayers.
|
20 September 2021 |
|
Unproven illness and failure to account for each day of delay defeated extension of time application.
Extension of time – discretion to grant – applicant must account for each day of delay – alleged illness must be proved by medical evidence – lack of clear date of knowledge of proceedings insufficient to excuse delay – failure to exhaust or set aside interlocutory tribunal orders noted.
|
20 September 2021 |
|
Illegality on the face of the record (non‑joinder/improper tribunal composition) justified extension of time for the applicant.
Limitation of actions – s.14(1) Law of Limitation Act – extension of time – discretion to be exercised on good cause. Illegality on the face of the record – improper composition/quorum of Ward Tribunal – judgment lacking reasons – non‑joinder of necessary party. Authorities – Mbogo; Principal Secretary, Ministry of Defence v Valambhia; Lyamuya Construction – illegality as ground for enlargement of time.
|
20 September 2021 |
|
Appellate court upheld tribunal’s decision that it lacked jurisdiction because title evidence placed the land in another district.
Land jurisdiction — territorial competence of District Land and Housing Tribunal — determination by title deed, caveat and land officer’s evidence — parties cannot confer jurisdiction by consent.
|
20 September 2021 |
|
Court allowed withdrawal of application and refused respondents’ costs after respondents evicted applicant while proceedings were pending.
Land procedure — withdrawal of application — court’s discretion on costs under section 30(1) Civil Procedure Code — eviction overtaking proceedings — refusal to award costs where respondents’ conduct rendered application nugatory.
|
19 September 2021 |
|
Earlier offer and possession established plaintiff's ownership despite later certificate; municipal council not compellable to issue title.
Land — Ownership dispute — Competing documentary evidence: earlier letter of offer, rent payments and building permit versus later certificate of title; double allocation due to poor coordination between municipal, city and ministry land authorities; municipal council issues offers but cannot alone process/issue title deeds; award of damages requires proof of loss.
|
17 September 2021 |
|
Whether respondent proved ownership from vendor testimony and sale agreement and whether the suit was time-barred.
Land law – ownership disputes – conflicting sale agreements executed by same vendor – evidentiary weight of witness testimony and vendor’s account. Limitation – cause of action accrual – action held to have accrued in 2014, suit filed in 2017 not time-barred. Procedure – description of land – Regulation 3(2)(b) satisfied by location in application and plot number in sale agreement. Evidence – signature on sale agreement may indicate acting on behalf of an entity rather than personal ownership.
|
17 September 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where no arguable case shown and the High Court had considered the lost sale agreement.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – requirement to establish an arguable case worth determination by the Court of Appeal; affidavit must disclose grounds. Evidence – consideration of allegedly lost sale agreement and weight of evidence on ownership. Procedural – submissions from counsel cannot introduce new evidential facts absent in the affidavit.
|
17 September 2021 |
|
The applicant’s res sub judice and prematurity objection to the respondent’s counterclaim was overruled; prior proceedings differed or were finalized.
Civil Procedure – res sub judice – section 8 Civil Procedure Code (Cap.33 R.E.2019) – requirements: same matter, same parties, competent court, pendency – preliminary objection to counterclaim – prematurity – finalized execution and applications do not constitute pendency.
|
17 September 2021 |
|
Applicant granted extension to file appeal documents due to illness and certified delay.
Extension of time – Section 11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – factors: cause, length, accounting for delay, prejudice, illegality – Lyamuya principles applied – illness and delay in supply of certified copies (Rule 90 certificate) can constitute sufficient cause.
|
17 September 2021 |
|
|
16 September 2021 |
|
Detention as execution is a last resort; application struck out for lacking affidavit and asset-exhaustion evidence.
Execution of decree – Arrest and detention as mode of execution – Section 42(c) and Order XXI Rule 28 – Affidavit requirement – Exhaustion of ordinary execution remedies (attachment/sale, identification of assets) – Premature application struck out.
|
15 September 2021 |
|
Applicant’s medical evidence and alleged illegality insufficient to show good cause for nine‑year delay; extension dismissed.
Land law – extension of time under section 41(2) Land Disputes Courts Act – requirement of good cause – medical incapacity must be proved with specific, credible evidence and accounting for each day of delay – illegality must be apparent on the face of the record to justify extension – procedural objection to counter‑affidavit to be raised timely.
|
15 September 2021 |
|
Applicant failed to show prima facie case, irreparable harm or balance of convenience to justify interim injunction against bank's mortgage enforcement.
Interim injunctions — requirements of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury; enforcement of mortgage security; effect of spouse's signed consent to mortgage; adequacy of damages as remedy.
|
15 September 2021 |
|
Applicant failed to show prima facie case, irreparable harm or favorable balance of convenience; injunction against mortgage enforcement denied.
Interim injunctions – requirements: prima facie case; balance of convenience; irreparable injury – Atilio v Mbowe principles applied; Mortgage/consent – spouse's signed consent form held fatal to applicant's claim of non‑consent; Banking/security law – court reluctant to restrain enforcement of mortgage where damages are adequate and creditor's contractual rights exist.
|
15 September 2021 |
|
Extension of time granted where e-filing within time was frustrated by administrative/e‑filing issues; 30 days to file appeal.
Land law — Extension of time — Section 41(1) & (2) Land Disputes Courts Act — Electronic filing status and administrative transfer as cause — Court's discretionary grant of extension where e-filing within time but not admitted due to system/registry handling.
|
15 September 2021 |
|
Suing the District Executive Director and the Solicitor General was improper; suit struck out and costs awarded.
Land procedure – Misjoinder of parties – District Council is a body corporate and must be sued in its own name; suing District Executive Director improper; Government suits – Solicitor General not a legal person to be sued; Civil Procedure Code Order 1 Rule 10(3) – court discretion to add necessary parties; failure to prosecute and non-compliance with court orders may justify striking out a suit and awarding costs.
|
14 September 2021 |
|
Affidavits containing legal arguments and conclusions are incurably defective and should be struck out with leave to refile.
Affidavit content — Order XIX Rule 3(1) CPC; affidavits must be factual, not contain legal argument or conclusions; incurable defects — striking out vs amendment; preliminary objection — remedy and leave to file corrected affidavit.
|
14 September 2021 |
|
Applicant granted 45-day extension to file Notice of Appeal after satisfactorily explaining delay and showing diligence.
Extension of time – Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.11(1) – requirements for extension: account for delay, diligence, valid explanation; layperson’s inadvertence and prior certification application as sufficient cause; exercise of court’s discretionary equitable power.
|
13 September 2021 |
|
Oral variations to a written lease were not proved; the written 1993 tenancy rate applied and plaintiffs' claim was dismissed.
Land law – Tenancy – Variation of a written lease – Oral variation not admissible to contradict or vary written terms (Evidence Act ss.100–101). Evidence – Documentary primacy – Written contract governs where terms are reduced to writing; addendum required for valid variation. Civil procedure – Claim for rent arrears – burden to prove variation and arrears; bank records and circumstantial evidence assessed.
|
13 September 2021 |
|
The applicant failed to prove an oral variation to a written tenancy, so the rent-arrears suit was dismissed with costs.
Land law – tenancy – written tenancy agreement – variation of terms – requirement for written addendum; Evidence – parol evidence rule – sections 100 and 101 Evidence Act – oral evidence inadmissible to contradict written contract; Contract – burden of proof for variation and rent arrears; Civil procedure – claim for rent arrears dismissed for failure to prove terms and breach.
|
13 September 2021 |
|
Court refuses to set aside taxing master's ruling; no shown injudicious exercise of discretion on EFD receipt issue.
Civil procedure — Taxation of costs — Review under Advocates Remuneration Order — standard for interfering with taxing master's discretion. Taxation — Proof of instruction fees — role of Electronic Fiscal Device (EFD) receipts and conflicting authorities on their mandatory nature. Administrative law — When a court will set aside a taxing officer's decision — only for injudicious exercise of discretion or wrong principle.
|
13 September 2021 |
|
Court granted extension of time under section 93 for technical delay caused by COVID‑19 and judicial transfer, without costs.
Civil Procedure – section 93 CPC – extension of time – requirement to show good cause; discretion to be exercised judicially (Mbogo v Shah). Technical delay – COVID-19 pandemic and judicial transfer affecting delivery of judgment may constitute sufficient cause (Fortunatus Masha). Extension of time to file application to set aside ex parte judgment – granted without costs.
|
12 September 2021 |
|
Leave granted to appeal whether delay in obtaining letters of administration can justify extension of time to set aside a dismissal order.
Civil procedure — leave to appeal — extension of time to apply to set aside dismissal for want of prosecution — sufficiency of cause where original appellant died and administrator appointed after dismissal — delay in obtaining letters of administration.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
High Court quashed tribunal ruling lacking reasons and order, remitting file for a proper ruling.
Land law – Revision under s.43(1)(b) LDCA; Civil Procedure – requirement under Order XX Rule 4 CPC for concise statement, points, decision and reasons; Necessity of an accompanying formal order specifying relief; Failure to file written submissions treated as non-appearance; Remedy – quash and remit for proper ruling.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
Applicant’s sickness and financial hardship did not justify extension of time to appeal; application dismissed.
Extension of time – requirements for 'good cause' – applicant must account for each day of delay and show diligence (Lyamuya factors). Evidence of illness – adequacy of medical chit/hospital records to prove incapacity and justify delay. Limitation – financial hardship alone is not sufficient ground for extension of time. Procedural – obligation to request/obtain certified copies of judgment to pursue timely appeal.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
Court grants leave to appeal, finding the applicant raised arguable contentious issues fit for the Court of Appeal.
Appellate procedure – s.5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – leave to appeal to Court of Appeal. Leave to appeal – requirement of contentious or arguable points of law/fact. Grounds for appeal – uncertainty of contract, contradictory witness evidence, vendor’s capacity, proof of title, relevancy of issues and assessors’ opinions. Procedural – ex parte status after service by publication and absence of respondent submissions.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
High Court granted leave to appeal under section 5(1)(c) AJA, finding the applicant’s points arguable.
Appellate Jurisdiction Act s5(1)(c) — leave to appeal — requirement of arguable/contentious points; notice of appeal; ex parte proceedings after service by publication; assessors’ opinion; procedural sufficiency for leave.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
A plaintiff must seek to set aside a tribunal dismissal under Regulation 11(2) before filing a fresh suit; failure renders suit incompetent.
Land law — Procedural requirements — Regulation 11(2) GN. No.174/2003 — necessity to apply to set aside Tribunal dismissal before instituting fresh suit; Civil Procedure Code (Order IX Rule 3) inapplicable where Tribunal regulations provide remedy; failure to exhaust statutory remedy renders suit incompetent.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
Advocate negligence must be proven to set aside dismissal; bald assertions insufficient, application dismissed with no costs.
Civil procedure – Order IX Rule 9 – restoration of dismissed suit for non-appearance; Failure to file written submissions – constitutes failure to prosecute and permits ex parte determination; Advocate negligence – may be sufficient ground to set aside dismissal only if credibly proved with supporting evidence.
|
10 September 2021 |
|
High Court allowed extension of time to appeal where delay (late judgment copy, criminal proceedings) justified relief and tribunal erred.
Land law – extension of time – sufficiency of reasons – delay in obtaining certified judgment and intervening criminal proceedings may constitute sufficient cause. Procedural fairness – judicial discretion – tribunal must analyze and give reasons when exercising discretion to grant extension of time. Revisional power – High Court may under s.43(1)(b) correct material errors causing injustice by lower land tribunal. Overriding objective – Article 107A(2)(e) permits relief from technicalities that obstruct justice.
|
9 September 2021 |
|
High Court certified two points of law and granted leave to appeal on proper coram and whether it could act as direct appellate court.
Land law – Appeals from Ward Tribunals – Mandatory certification of points of law under s.47(3) LDCA – Proper constitution/coram of Ward Tribunal – Competence of High Court as second appellate court acting directly where District Tribunal did not decide on merits.
|
8 September 2021 |
|
Revision granted where tribunal improperly entered ex parte judgment against a deceased party, violating the right to be heard.
Land law – procedure – substitution of parties after death – tribunal must substitute deceased by administrator before proceeding to judgment. Civil procedure – ex parte judgment – illegitimate where tribunal is aware of party’s death and no substitution made. Constitutional law – right to be heard (Article 13(6)(a)) – failure to afford hearing breaches natural justice and nullifies decision. Revision – High Court’s power to quash tribunal proceedings where natural justice violated.
|
8 September 2021 |
|
Intermittent assessor participation vitiated the tribunal hearing; proceedings nullified and retrial ordered.
Land Disputes Courts Act (Cap 216) – assessors’ attendance and participation – section 23(3) – assessors must hear all evidence – unclear involvement of assessors renders trial a nullity – section 45 (curing irregularities) inapplicable where failure of justice occasioned – revisional powers under section 43(1)(b) – retrial ordered.
|
8 September 2021 |