Nantale v Attorney General & 2 Ors (Civil Application No. 286 of 2014) [2018] UGCA 70 (14 August 2018)

Flynote

Registrar|Consent Order|Jurisdiction|CL

Case summary

The dispute emanated from an unsuccessful ex parte application by House of Dadwa (third respondent) claiming land from the first and second respondents.  After the ex parte application was dismissed, the third respondent appealed the dismissal which was disposed of by a consent order. The applicant challenged the consent order on the basis that the registrar of court did not have jurisdiction to dispose of an appeal and wanted the consent order to be set aside. The respondents argued that the registrar of the Court of Appeal has the same power as the registrar of High Court. The respondents also raised the issue of lack of locus standi on the part of the applicant. The court held that the general rule provides that no appeal can be settled by consent. It ruled that the issue of locus standi cannot stop the court from considering whether the registrar has power to issue judgment by consent. The court found that an appeal lies from a decision of the High Court, where the judgment is not challenged the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to hear such a matter. The court sustained the objection to the consent order.

---