THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA (COA) AT
CIVIL APPLICATION NUMBER 0130 OF 2012
. ASIIMWE DIANA JACKLINE }
2. HENRY MUGENYI
3. STEVEN SERWADDA
DR AGGREY KIYINGI·
HON. MR. JUSTICE. KENNETH KAKURU, JA
st July 2013
This is an appeal by way of reference from a decision of The learne
t Registrar of this court to a single Justice of Appeal. There is no
ndication as under what law this appeal or reference has been brought. I
presume it was brought under Rule 110 of the Rules of this court.
licants in this matter were all the material time represented by Mr.
Eric Muhwezi and Mr
. Latigo was for the respondent. Mr. Muhwezi
ractices in the name and style of MIS Muhanguzi, Muhwezi & Co.
s whose address is NIC building 2nd floor9 (Annex) Pilkington
O. Box 7456 Kampala.
At the he
aring of this application, Mr. Muhwezi was absent. However one of
s, the 3rd applicant Mr. Steven Serwadda was present in court. Mr.
a informed court that his counsel Mr. Eric Muhwezi was
ed and applied for an adjournment on that account.
clined to grant the adjournment as no sufficient cause had been
wadda himself an advocate was asked to proceed with the
on as a party.
. Serwadda urgued grounds 1 & 2 of the Memorandum of Appeal
that the bill of costs was drawn and filed against 5 applicants
the case was at all material times against only 3 persons namely;
iimwe Diana Jackline
ed that Steven Karangwa and the Commissioner for Land
ion where not parties to the case and should not have been
n the taxation proceedings.
second ground, he argued that the respondent had committed
t of this court when they refused to obey the court order in
aneous Application Number
135 of 2009
to deposit certificates of
title in co
urt but instead sold the two titles to avoid execution in High Court
from which the taxation proceedings on appeal
in this co
urt eventually arose.
At the h
earing of this application, court brought to the attention of Mr.
a the fact that the order of the Assistant Registrar of this court
rected the respondent in this matter Dr. Aggrey Kiyingi to deposit
land titles was signed on 23rd day of November 2009. The
on itself was heard on 20th October 2009.This was ascertained
from the r
ecord filed in this court by the applicants.
so brought to the attention of Mr. Serwadda the fact that his own
of Reference at pages 37 and 40 contains copies of the said land
o of them. The record indicates that the said titles had been
ed from the names of Dr. Aggrey Kiyingi the respondent herein to
one Mohammed Ssekatawa on 14th October 2009. Accordingly
there is n
o way Dr. Kiyingi could have deposited titles in court which were
his property at the time when the order was made.
alizing the above, Mr. Serwadda withdrew ground 2 of the
ndum of Reference.
Mr. Latigo learned counsel for the respondent urgued that the
Assistant Registrar correctly dismissed the preliminary objection
the taxation hearing. The objection that the proceedings were in
of 5 applicants yet the parties to the case were only 3, he urgued
de without any basis. He contended that at all material times the
o the application and appeal were five and not three.
ced a notice of appeal in this matter to the Supreme Court that
pared, drawn and filed by MIS Muhanguzi, Muhwezi & Co.
indicates all the five applicants.
brought to the attention of court the order of this court from which
tion proceedings emanated. The order is in respect of five
s, this order was also drawn and filed by MIS Muhanguzi and
Advocates of the same address. Both the order and the notice of
bove mentioned were signed by Mr. Eric Muhwezi himself.
d for the dismissal of the application.
2nd ground of appeal was withdrawn, I will not dwell on It. suffice
that had the advocate been more deligent he would have
ed that Dr. Kiyingi had transferred the property to the third party
e application was heard and before the order was made. This kind
by an advocate is unacceptable at this court
one of memorandum of Reference as already noted is also
e. Counsel for the applicant himself drew the order from which the
proceedings arose. The order named as applicants, 5 applicants
In his ow
n notice of appeal the advocate names five intended appellants.
I do not u
nderstand how the same person could then insist that the matter
in respect of three applicants. The Assistant Registrar in this
as justified when she dismissed the preliminary objection.
I find this
application frivolous, a waste of court's time and abuse of court
This is a
matter in which costs should have been awarded against the
in person. I will not do so now.
cation must therefore be dismissed, and it's hereby dismissed
HON. MR.JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU
sT JULY 2013