Share
Lawoko Winnie Olwe v Nalinny Dorothy and Registrar of Land Titles (Misc Application No. I29 of 2022) [2025] UGHCLD 77 (16 January 2025)
- Citation
- [2025] UGHCLD 77
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Asiimwe, J
- Case number
- Misc Application No. I29 of 2022
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Asiimwe, J
- Case number
- Misc Application No. I29 of 2022
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application was dismissed because neither the applicant nor her counsel appeared for the hearing, and there was no justification for their absence on record. The court relied on Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which empowers the court to dismiss an application for nonappearance. Costs were awarded to the second respondent as a consequence of the dismissal.
Court disposition
application dismissed for nonappearance
Orders
- The application is dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Applicant shall pay costs to the second respondent.
02
Material facts
Parties
Lawoko Winnie Olwe
ApplicantNalinnya Dorothy
RespondentRegistrar of Land Titles
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application should be heard in the absence of the applicant and her counsel.
- 02
Whether the application should be dismissed for nonappearance under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 03
Who should bear the costs of the application.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules
An application may be dismissed for nonappearance of the applicant and their counsel.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application was dismissed because neither the applicant nor her counsel appeared for the hearing, and there was no justification for their absence on record. The court relied on Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which empowers the court to dismiss an application for nonappearance. Costs were awarded to the second respondent as a consequence of the dismissal.
Court disposition
application dismissed for nonappearance
- The application is dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Applicant shall pay costs to the second respondent.
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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COPURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
LAND DIVISION
MISC APPLICATION NO. I29 OF 2022
LAWOKO WINNIE OLWE: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :APPLICANT
VERSUS
I. NALINNYA DOROTHY 2. REGISTRAR OF LAND TITLES: : : :: : : : : : :: : : :RESPONDENTS
BEFORE THE HON. JUSTICE TADEO ASIIM]UE
RULING
This Application was adjourned to today for hearing in the presence of the Applicant and his Counsel. The Applicant and her lawyer have not appeared and there is nothing on record tojustify their absence.
Accordingly, the Application is dismissed under Order 9 tule 22 of CPR.
Applicant shall pay costs to 2nd Respondent.
\ MWE \ TAD rtfl,-\_t-;.n,
JUDGE
1610U2025.
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.