Download

Uganda Judgment

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Okello Geoffrey v Hospital Management Board Lira Regional Referral Hospital (Civil Appeal No: 265 of 2016) [2018] UGCA 254 (14 August 2018)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court, upon agreement of both parties and their advocates, ordered the respondent to leave out a 10-metre strip of land from the appellant's demolished wall fence and permitted construction only outside this area and between the respondent's two storeyed buildings. The order was made to preserve the status quo and prevent further disputes or irreparable harm pending the final judgment in Civil Appeal No. 265 of 2016. The order is to be implemented jointly by the parties and their advocates and remains in force until the appeal is determined.

Court disposition

consent_order_granted_pending_judgment

Orders

  • The respondent shall leave out 10 metres of land starting from the appellant's demolished wall fence.
  • The respondent is authorised to continue construction only outside the 10-metre area and between its two storeyed buildings.
  • Parties and their advocates shall meet on the suit land to implement the order on 18th August 2018 at 10:00am.
  • This order shall remain in force until judgment in Civil Appeal No. 265 of 2016 is delivered.

02

Material facts

Parties

Okello Geoffrey

Appellant Counsel: Justine Gumtwero

The Hospital Management Board; Lira Regional Referral Hospital

Respondent Counsel: Louis Odongo

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Appeal / Consent Order Pending Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant sought to preserve the status quo of the suit land, requesting that the respondent be restrained from further construction within a specified area pending the outcome of the appeal, to prevent irreparable harm and maintain the appellant's interests.
Respondent
The respondent agreed to leave out a 10-metre area from the appellant's demolished wall fence but sought permission to continue construction outside the specified area and between its existing buildings, pending judgment.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court practice in interim orders and injunctions.

    Preservation of the status quo pending determination of the substantive dispute.

  2. 02

    Civil Procedure Act, Section 98.

    Consent orders are binding on parties and remain in force until varied or set aside by the court.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court, upon agreement of both parties and their advocates, ordered the respondent to leave out a 10-metre strip of land from the appellant's demolished wall fence and permitted construction only outside this area and between the respondent's two storeyed buildings. The order was made to preserve the status quo and prevent further disputes or irreparable harm pending the final judgment in Civil Appeal No. 265 of 2016. The order is to be implemented jointly by the parties and their advocates and remains in force until the appeal is determined.

Obiter and limits

  • The cooperation of both parties in reaching a consent order is commended and serves the interests of justice.
  • Implementation of the order by both parties and their advocates on site will ensure clarity and prevent future misunderstandings.

Court disposition

consent_order_granted_pending_judgment

  • The respondent shall leave out 10 metres of land starting from the appellant's demolished wall fence.
  • The respondent is authorised to continue construction only outside the 10-metre area and between its two storeyed buildings.
  • Parties and their advocates shall meet on the suit land to implement the order on 18th August 2018 at 10:00am.
  • This order shall remain in force until judgment in Civil Appeal No. 265 of 2016 is delivered.

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

[2018] UGCA 254

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA HOLDEN AT KAMPALA CIVIL APPEAL NO: 265 OF 2016 BETWEEN

٠.,

OKELLO GEOFFREY:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

$\mathbf{v}\mathbf{s}_\cdot$

THE HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT BOARD; LIRA REGIONAL REFERRAL HOSPITAL::::::::::::RESPONDENT

CONSENT ORDER

This matter is coming up for further direction as to the status quo of the suit land pending delivery of judgment in Civil Appeal No:265 of 2016, this 14<sup>th</sup> day of August 2018, before His Lordship, the Hon. Justice R. Kasule in the presence of all the parties.

IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT AND THAT FOR THE RESPONDENT AS WELL AS THE REPRESENTATIVE $OF$ THE THE APPELLANT AND RESPONDENT, AND ORDERED AS FOLLOWS;

- 1. The respondent shall leave out 10 metres of land starting from the appellant's wall fence demolished by the respondent on the $23/02/2018$ . - 2. The respondent is hereby authorised to continue with construction within the areas outside the 10 metres herein described above and between the 2 storeyed buildings belonging to the respondent. - 3. Parties are to meet on the suit land together with the respective advocates to implement the order; on Saturday the $18$ <sup>th</sup> day of August, 2018 at 10:00am. - 4. This order shall remain inforce until judgment in Civil Appeal No:265 of 2016 is delivered.

Executed and signed at Kampala, Court of Appeal, this 14<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2018.

of. A. U.g. ust...................................

Okello Geoffrey-the Appellant. Justine Gumtwero- Counsel for the Appellant....... Paul Mulindwa-Senior Administrator-Lira Regional Referral Hospital........ $\cdots$ $\mathcal{M}$ Louis Odongo- Counsel for the Respondent... Given under my hand and seal of this court, this ... I. H. T.....day

JŬDGE/REG<del>IS</del>TRAR

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.

Civil Procedure Act, Section 98

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.