Share
Sanlam General Insurance Limited v Quality Milk Dairies Limited (Miscellaneous Application 51 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 285 (15 May 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] UGCommC 285
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- Commercial Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Anna B. Mugenyi, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 51 of 2023
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Commercial Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Anna B. Mugenyi, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 51 of 2023
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that both parties had filed written submissions in Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 as agreed, but this fact was not brought to the court's attention at the time of dismissal. The absence of consideration of these submissions constituted an error on the face of the record. The court held that this error provided sufficient cause for review under Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Consequently, the order dismissing Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 was set aside, and the application was reinstated to ensure that the parties' submissions are duly considered before a final determination is made.
Court disposition
Application for review allowed; dismissal order set aside; Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 reinstated.
Orders
- The order dismissing Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 is set aside.
- Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 is reinstated.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
02
Material facts
Parties
Sanlam General Insurance Limited
ApplicantQuality Milk Dairies Limited
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether this is a proper matter for review of the order of dismissal of Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022.
- 02
Whether sufficient cause has been shown to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the application.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that both parties had agreed to file written submissions in Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022, which were duly filed on ECCMIS in September 2022. The applicant believed the matter was coming up for a ruling, but this was not communicated by the Court. The applicant contended that the dismissal order was made in error as the submissions had not been considered.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not present proceedings to show otherwise and did not bring to the Court's attention that submissions had been filed. No evidence was provided to contradict the applicant's position regarding the filing and consideration of submissions.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)
A court may review its order where there is an error apparent on the face of the record or sufficient cause is shown.
- 02
General principles of fair hearing and procedural justice
Parties are entitled to have their submissions considered before a final determination is made.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that both parties had filed written submissions in Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 as agreed, but this fact was not brought to the court's attention at the time of dismissal. The absence of consideration of these submissions constituted an error on the face of the record. The court held that this error provided sufficient cause for review under Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Consequently, the order dismissing Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 was set aside, and the application was reinstated to ensure that the parties' submissions are duly considered before a final determination is made.
Court disposition
Application for review allowed; dismissal order set aside; Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 reinstated.
- The order dismissing Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 is set aside.
- Misc. Application No. 257 of 2022 is reinstated.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Source and reliance status
Commercial Court 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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Commercial Court of Uganda
Judgment
THE REPUBTIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (coMMERCTAL DTVTSION)
MISC. APPLICATION NO.51 OF 2023
SANLAM GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::!::: APPLICANT
VERSUS
QUALITY MILK DAIRIES LIMITED :::::i:3::::::::::::::::::3::::::::::::: RESPONDENT
BEFORE: HON. LADYJUSTICE ANNA. B. MUGENYI
RULING
I have read the pleadings and listened to the submissions of both counsel.
The main issue for determination by this Court is whether this is a proper matter for review of the order of dismissal of Misc. Application No. 25712022 on 2llll22.
It has been brought to the attention of this Court that when Misc. Application No. 25712022 came up for hearing on2/1112022; both parties to the application had agreed to file written submissions which they did and filed on ECCMIS on 5th, 8th and 23'd September 2022 respectively. In the understanding of the Applicant therein, the mafter was coming up for a ruling although this position was not communicated by the Court.
The fact that submissions had been filed earlier on as agreed by the two parties was not brought to the attention of Court and neither have proceedings reflecting the reverse been presented by the Respondent. I have checked ECCMIS and I have established that indeed submissions were filed by all the parties in September 2022 and it is only in order that the same are considered before final determination of Misc. Application No. 257 | 2022.
Having determined as above and on the basis of an error on the face of the record, this Court is of the firm view that this is a proper matter for review of the order made dismissing Misc. Application No. 257 12022.
In the circumstances, the Applicant has shown sufficient cause for review of the aforementioned order and the same is accordingly set aside and Misc. Application No. 257 12022 is reinstated.
Costs shall be in the cause.
vJ\*a
HON. LADY JUSTICE ANNA .8. MUGENYI
DATED <sup>|</sup>515 1..\*5...
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.