Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Muyinza Mukasa v Musisi Ssekyaya (H.C.Miscellaneous Application 665 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 121 (12 May 2023)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the applicant, having been the lawful attorney of the deceased in the head suit and nominated by family members to administer the estate, is a fit and proper person to be appointed administrator ad litem. The absence of letters of administration does not preclude her appointment for the limited purpose of prosecuting the pending suit. The court relied on Order 24 Rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 222 of the Succession Act to allow the application, order substitution of the applicant as plaintiff, and direct amendment of pleadings.

Court disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is appointed administrator ad litem to represent the late Major General Eric Mukasa in HCCS No. 934 of 2019 and related suits.
  • The applicant is substituted as plaintiff in the head suit and the name of the deceased is replaced with her name.
  • The pleadings in the suit shall be amended within fifteen days from the date of the ruling.
  • The head suit is fixed for hearing/scheduling on June 20, 2023 at 10am.
  • Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the head suit.

02

Material facts

Parties

Edith Muyinza Mukasa

Applicant Counsel: Ronald Bogezi with Eric Mukasa

Donozio Musisi Ssekyaya

Respondent Counsel: Banadawa Sawuya

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Application / Ruling

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant argued that she was the lawful attorney of the late Major General Eric Mukasa in the head suit and is one of the four family nominees to administer his estate. She contended that no family member has been issued letters of administration, the main suit is pending, and risks dismissal for want of prosecution unless she is appointed administrator ad litem and substituted as plaintiff.
Respondent
The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the applicant had not demonstrated the necessity for her appointment as representative of the deceased and questioned her suitability to represent the estate in the absence of letters of administration.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Order 24 Rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules

    Where a sole plaintiff dies and the cause of action survives, the court shall cause the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff to be made a party and proceed with the suit.

  2. 02

    Section 222 of the Succession Act

    The court may appoint an administrator ad litem limited for the purpose of representing the deceased in a suit.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the applicant, having been the lawful attorney of the deceased in the head suit and nominated by family members to administer the estate, is a fit and proper person to be appointed administrator ad litem. The absence of letters of administration does not preclude her appointment for the limited purpose of prosecuting the pending suit. The court relied on Order 24 Rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 222 of the Succession Act to allow the application, order substitution of the applicant as plaintiff, and direct amendment of pleadings.

Obiter and limits

  • The costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the head suit.
  • The appointment as administrator ad litem is limited to representation in the head suit and related matters.

Court disposition

application allowed

  • The applicant is appointed administrator ad litem to represent the late Major General Eric Mukasa in HCCS No. 934 of 2019 and related suits.
  • The applicant is substituted as plaintiff in the head suit and the name of the deceased is replaced with her name.
  • The pleadings in the suit shall be amended within fifteen days from the date of the ruling.
  • The head suit is fixed for hearing/scheduling on June 20, 2023 at 10am.
  • Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the head suit.

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

[2023] UGHCLD 121

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA D DIVISION Mtsc. APPLTCATTON N0.0665 0F 2023 (aB15,r UE\_ FRQM CLVLLsU rI Nq093rr q?qp)

EDITH MUYINZA MUKASA. APPLICANT

DONOZIO MUSISI SSEKYAYA RESPONDENT

BEFORE: HON. LADY JUSTICE P. BASAZA- WASSWA

RULING

Representation

Mr. Ronald Bogezi with Eric Mukasa for the Applicant

Ms. Banadawa Sawuya for the Respondent

tll This is a Ruling in an application brought by Notice of Motion under Section 98 of The Civil Procedure Actl, and Order 24 Rules 3 (1) & 12, and Order 6 Rule 19 of The Civil Procedure Rules2, as amended (CPR). The Applicant; Ms. Mukasa seeks for

the following orders

i) That she be appointed an administratol ad /item to represent the late Major General Eric Mukasa for purposes of prosecuting the Head suit vide HCCS No.

934 of 2019

Al\*u^hJrr^-^<l tlc

<sup>L</sup>('ap 7l rs.t 7t- <sup>l</sup>

Page I of4

- ii) That she be accordingly substituted as the plaintiff in the head suit, and that the plaint and/or pleadings be amended to that effect - iii) That the costs of the application be provided for - l2l The application is supported by the affidavit of Ms. Mukasa and the grounds set out therein are - i) That the Late Nzlajor General Eric Mukasa instituted the head suit on the 28i0.2019 through the applicant (his sister) as his attorney - ii) That before the formal hearing of the suit commenced, the Plaintiff- Major General Eric Mukasa died on the 2.07.2020 and the progress of the suit has since stalled - iii) That none of the family members has been issued with Letters of Administration yet the main suit is strll pending and will most likely be dismissed for want of prosecution for failure to take the necessary steps to prosecute the same - l3l The Respondent: Mr. Ssekyaya filed an affidavit in reply opposing the application, the main thrust of which is that the Applicant has not demonstrated that it is necessary to appoint her as the representative of the deceased

Analysis by Court:

l4l Order 24 Rule 3 (1) of the CPR provides that where a sole plaintiff dies and the cause of action survives or continues, the court, on an application made for that IUc blJ.^^^,'r^/\ I l'lC

purpose, shall cause the legal representatrve of the deceased plaintiff to be made a party and shall proceed with the suit

Section 222 of the Succession Act3 as Amended, permits the appointment of an administrator ad litem, limiled for the pu rpose of representing the deceased in that suit

tsl I have carefully considered all the arguments for and against this application, and I find that, since the applicant was the lawful attorney of the late Major General Eric Mukasa in the head suit while he was alive, and since she is also one of the four (4) nominees by members of their family to administer his estate, she is a fit and proper person to be appointed as an administrator; ad /item to represent his estate for purposes of prosecuting the Head suit.

Decision of Court

- t6l ln the result, this application is allowed in the following terms; - a) The Applicant: Ms. Edith Muyinza Mukasa is hereby appointed an Administrator ad litem, limtted for the purpose of representing the late Major General Eric Mukasa in the Head suit: HCCS. NO. 934 of 2019, and such other causes and suits which may have, or may be, commenced between the parties, or any other parties, touching the matters in issue in the Head suit - b) The Applicant is accordingly made a party to the Head suit and the name of the deceased is substituted with her name

IfmulJaa"^-r.. lr1(,-

'( up. 16l

- c) The Pleadings in the suit shall be amended to that effect, within fifteen (15) days from the date of this Ruling. - d) The Head suit shall proceed and is fixed for Hearrng / Scheduling on June 20, 202 3 at 10am - e) The Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the Head suit

I so order,

tk<tb[^\*.'-at\i

P. BASAZA. WASSWA JUDGE

May 12,2023

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.

Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Order 24 Rules 3(1) & 12, Order 6 Rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 222 of the Succession Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.