Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Edward Ssenteza v Cyril Kambarage Chigange and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1662 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 84 (12 June 2025)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that since the applicant, Edward Ssenteza, expressly distanced himself from the application filed by his former advocates and the said advocates had withdrawn from representing him, the application for a hearing date in MA No. 1662 of 2024 was rendered untenable. The court therefore dismissed the application, noting that there was no basis to proceed with a hearing for an application that the applicant no longer supported or owned. No order as to costs was made, reflecting the abandonment and lack of opposition.

Court disposition

application dismissed as untenable

Orders

  • MA No. 1662 of 2024 is dismissed with no order as to costs.

02

Material facts

Parties

Edward Ssenteza

Applicant Counsel: Ms. Jambo & Co. Advocates (former); Droit Advocates (current)

Cyril Kambarage Chigange

Respondent

Karim Hirji

Respondent

Anil Damani

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Hearing Date

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the application for a hearing date in MA No. 1662 of 2024 is tenable after the main suit was dismissed and the applicant's advocate withdrew representation.

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant, through Ms. Jambo & Co. Advocates, requested a hearing date for MA No. 1662 of 2024. However, the applicant, now represented by Droit Advocates, clarified that the application was filed by his former advocates and subsequently abandoned after their withdrawal.
Respondent
The respondents did not present any arguments as the application was effectively abandoned by the applicant and his former advocates.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court's inherent jurisdiction and practice direction on abandoned applications.

    An application becomes untenable if the applicant disowns it and the advocate who filed it has withdrawn from representation.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that since the applicant, Edward Ssenteza, expressly distanced himself from the application filed by his former advocates and the said advocates had withdrawn from representing him, the application for a hearing date in MA No. 1662 of 2024 was rendered untenable. The court therefore dismissed the application, noting that there was no basis to proceed with a hearing for an application that the applicant no longer supported or owned. No order as to costs was made, reflecting the abandonment and lack of opposition.

Court disposition

application dismissed as untenable

  • MA No. 1662 of 2024 is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Source and reliance status

HC: Land Division (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

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Judgment

[2025] UGHCLD 84

<sup>5</sup> THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

(LAND DTVTSTON)

MISCELLENEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1662 OF 2024

(AR|S|NG FROM CtVtL SU|T NO. 108 OF 2024)

IO EDWARO SSENTEZA ==APPLICANT

-VS.

- 1. CYRIL KAMBARAGE CHIGANGE - 2. KARIM HIRJI - 3. ANIL DAMANI RESPONDENTS

r5 Before: Hon. Lady Justice Olive Kazaarwe Mukwaya

RULING

This court received a request for a hearing date in this application MA no. 1662 of 2024 arising from Civil Suit no. lOB of 2024.

l0

The request was made by Ms. Jambu & Co. Advocates vide a letter dated lsrApril 2025, apparently on behalf of Mr. Ssenleza the Applicant. lt is a fact that Civil Suit no. 108 of 2O24 was dismissed on the 25'h June 2024.

Further, the counter claim under Civil Suit no. 108 ol 2024 is pending hearing. The Counter Defendant, Mr. Edward Ssenteza is represented by Droit Advocates. When the counter claim came up for hearing today Mr. Edward Ssenteza clarified that MA. NO.

l5 1662 OF 2024 was filed by his former advocates Ms. Jambo & Co. Advocates and then abandoned when his advocate withdrew from representing him. ln effect, Mr. Edward Ssenteza distanced himself from MS Jambo & Co. Advocates and the letter requesting for a hearing date in MA no. 1662 ot 2024.

<sup>5</sup> This clarification in my view renders MA. No. 1662 of 2024 untenable and it is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

ro Ol ve Kazaarwe Mukwaya JUDGE

> 12th June 2025 Delivered by Eccmis to Counsel for the parties.

t5

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.