Download

Uganda Judgment

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Charles Mayambala v Uganda Commercial Bank (Civil Appeal No. 4/98) [1998] UGCA 59 (26 October 1998)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court of Appeal found that since the appellant had disowned the record of appeal filed by his dismissed lawyers and had not filed a new record of appeal, there was no valid appeal pending before the court. In such circumstances, the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter, and the only proper course is to strike off the appeal. The absence of a record of appeal is fatal to the continuation of appellate proceedings, and the court cannot proceed in the absence of the essential procedural document. Accordingly, Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1998 was struck off the cause list.

Court disposition

appeal_struck_off

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1998 is struck off.
  • No order as to costs.

02

Material facts

Parties

Charles Mayambala

Appellant

Uganda Commercial Bank

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Appeal / Appeal Struck Off

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant disowned the record of appeal filed by his former lawyers, whom he had dismissed, and did not file another record of appeal.
Respondent
The respondent did not need to make submissions as the appellant had not filed a valid record of appeal, leaving no appeal pending before the court.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court practice and procedure

    An appeal cannot be entertained by the court in the absence of a valid record of appeal filed by the appellant.

  2. 02

    Court practice and procedure

    Where there is no appeal pending, the court must strike off the matter from its cause list.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that since the appellant had disowned the record of appeal filed by his dismissed lawyers and had not filed a new record of appeal, there was no valid appeal pending before the court. In such circumstances, the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter, and the only proper course is to strike off the appeal. The absence of a record of appeal is fatal to the continuation of appellate proceedings, and the court cannot proceed in the absence of the essential procedural document. Accordingly, Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1998 was struck off the cause list.

Court disposition

appeal_struck_off

  • Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1998 is struck off.
  • No order as to costs.

Source and reliance status

Court of Appeal of Uganda

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Judgment

[1998] UGCA 59

ANNEXTURE MARKED "B"

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4/98

CORAM: HON. MR. JUSTICE G. M. OKELLO, J. A., HON. MR. JUSTICE J. P. BERKO, J. A. & HON. MR. JUSTICE S. G. ENGWAU, J. A.

CHARLES MAYAMBALA. APPELLANT VERSUS

UGANDA COMMERCIAL BANK....................................

Court:

$\lambda_{\mathcal{K}}^{\mathcal{L}}$

$20$

$10$

The appellant having disowned the Record of Appeal that has been filed by his lawyers who he dismissed and having not filed another record of appeal, there is no appeal pending before this court. Court of Appeal No. 4 of 1998 is accordingly struck off.

No order as to cost.

Dated at Kampala this 26<sup>th</sup> day of October, 1998.

G. M. Okello Justice of Appeal.

J. P. Berko Justice of Appeal.

S. G. Engwau

Justice of Appeal.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.