Share
Wanjiko Ssedugge v Nanyonga (Miscellaneous Application 987 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 461 (27 November 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCLD 461
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 987 of 2023
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 987 of 2023
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The applicant, as the widow and co-executor of the deceased's estate, demonstrated a direct and sufficient interest in the pending suit, which survived the deceased. The court found that the process for obtaining full letters of administration was delayed and that, for the preservation of the estate's interest, it was just and expedient to grant letters of administration ad litem limited to the prosecution of the suit. The applicant was substituted as plaintiff and permitted to amend the plaint accordingly. The applicant's authority to execute consent judgments or settlements was restricted pending consultation with beneficiaries and administrators or further court orders. No costs were awarded.
Court disposition
application granted in part
Orders
- The applicant is substituted as plaintiff in the main suit and shall amend the plaint within fourteen days of this ruling.
- The applicant is not authorised to execute any consent judgment or out of court settlement unless and until she has fully consulted with the beneficiaries of the estate, with the authority of the administrators, or until further orders of the court.
- No orders as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Wanjiko Rose Ssedugge
Applicant Counsel: M/s Paul Sebunya & Co. AdvocatesNanyonga Joyce
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ex Parte Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether letters of administration ad litem should be granted to the applicant for purposes of representing the deceased in the pending suit.
- 02
Whether the applicant should be substituted as plaintiff in the main suit in place of the deceased.
- 03
Whether the applicant should be permitted to amend the plaint to reflect the substitution.
- 04
Whether the applicant is entitled to costs of the application.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant is the widow and co-executor of the deceased's estate, with a direct interest in the outcome of the main suit. The cause of action survived the deceased, and the process for full letters of administration is delayed due to pending issuance of a death certificate and objections. The applicant seeks limited letters of administration ad litem to represent the estate in the pending suit, substitution as plaintiff, and permission to amend the plaint.
- Respondent
- No respondent arguments were presented as the application was heard ex parte.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 222 of the Succession Act
Letters of administration ad litem may be granted for the limited purpose of representing a deceased litigant in a pending suit where the cause of action survives the deceased.
- 02
Order 24 rules 3 & 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1
Substitution of parties is permitted where a litigant dies before final determination and the cause of action survives.
- 03
Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1
Court may allow amendment of pleadings to reflect substitution of parties following death of a litigant.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The applicant, as the widow and co-executor of the deceased's estate, demonstrated a direct and sufficient interest in the pending suit, which survived the deceased. The court found that the process for obtaining full letters of administration was delayed and that, for the preservation of the estate's interest, it was just and expedient to grant letters of administration ad litem limited to the prosecution of the suit. The applicant was substituted as plaintiff and permitted to amend the plaint accordingly. The applicant's authority to execute consent judgments or settlements was restricted pending consultation with beneficiaries and administrators or further court orders. No costs were awarded.
Obiter and limits
- The applicant has attached a notice of death but not the official death certificate, which is pending due to administrative delays.
- No conflict of interest was found between the applicant and the deceased regarding the subject matter of the suit.
- Justice and expedience require preservation of the deceased's interest in the pending suit.
Court disposition
application granted in part
- The applicant is substituted as plaintiff in the main suit and shall amend the plaint within fourteen days of this ruling.
- The applicant is not authorised to execute any consent judgment or out of court settlement unless and until she has fully consulted with the beneficiaries of the estate, with the authority of the administrators, or until further orders of the court.
- No orders 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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
(LAND DIVISION)
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.0987 OF 2023
(Arising from Civil Suit No.0259 of 2014)
WANJIKO ROSE SSEDUGGE (Legal)
Representative of the late SSEDUGGE
PAUL::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.......
VERSUS
NANYONGA JOYCE:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 10
Before: Lady Justice Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya.
Ruling (exparte).
The applicant through her lawyers, *M/s Paul Sebunya* & Co. Advocates brought this application under the provisions of Section 33 of the Judicature Act cap.13, Section 98 of the 15 Civil Procedure Act cap. 71, Section 222 of the Succession Act, and Order 1 rule 10 (2), Order 6 rule 19 & Order 24 rules 3 & 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 seeking orders that;
1. Letters of administration ad litem to the estate of the late Paulino Ssedduge be granted to the applicant limited to High Court Land Division Civil Suit No.259 of 2014 Paulino Ssedugge versus Nanyonga Joyce, hereinafter referred to as the main suit for purposes of representing the plaintiff in the same and any matters arising therefrom.
Julorg
$\mathsf{S}$
$\bigg/$
$\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L} \times \mathcal{L}$
$\mathbf{v} = \frac{\mathbf{v}}{\mathbf{v} - \mathbf{v}}$
- 2. Leque be granted to sltbstitrtte the applicant qs the plaintifJ in the mo,in suit in place of the platnttff utho ts nout deceased,. - 5
3. I\*dae be granted to amend the plaint ln the main sult for purposes of the substihttion described in (2) aboue.
4. Costs of the applicatlon be prouided for.
Grounds of the application:
The grounds of the application are contained in the affidavit rn support deponed by the applicant but briefly Paulino Ssedduge died at Spital Thurgau Ag. Hospital Switzerland on the 4th of June 2O2l from where his body was repatriated and buried in Uganda, and that she is the deceased, sole widow having celebrated a civil marriage with him on 6th May 2005 at the Office of the Chief Administrator at Wakiso District. 10 15
At the time of death, the hearing of the defendant's evidence was ongoing. The applicant was appointed as the co-executor of the estate of the deceased who left a will dated 20th March 2O2O, and is a beneliciary of the deceased's estate in which her interest includes the suit property which was bequeathed her and her children thus the cause of action in the main suit survived the deceased.
That the applicant is a directly interested party in respect of the outcome of the main suit thereby justifying this application and that Mr. Rafael Mayanja Kakoki Sseddege, Mr. Emmanuel Muwanguzi (deceased), Mr. Elenawo Kajjubi, Mr. Abu Matovu, Mr. 25

Mbuga Kaggwa Wiiliams, and the applicant have petitioned the High Court Family Division for a grant of letters of probate vide Probate qnd Administration Cause No. 842 of 2O22 which application is still pending determination.
s That the hearing and determination of the above mentioned matter has been delayed by the National Identification and Registration Authority that is yet to issue a death certificate.
The delay was occasioned by the deceased's son who filed a complaint objecting to the application for the same and that the 10 hearing and disposal of the said complaint has taken months
owing to the fact that the complainant and his lawyers have not attended any of the meetings that have been scheduled by the authority in the past.
That the aforementioned delay has in turn affected the further 1s hearing and disposal of the main suit thereby justifying this application.
The applicant undertakes to prosecute the main suit and any matters arising herein in the interest of the deceased's estate's interest. That it is in the interest of justice and equity that this 20 application is granted.
Decision of court:
I have considered the merits of this application. I am satisfied that there is now pending in this honourable court a suit which was filed by the deceased.
Ul\*d
The orders sought are for grant of administration ad litemlirnited for the purpose of defending the suit which is still pending before this court, without powers of the applicant to distribute the estate.
It is noted that the process leading to issuance of letters of administration for the estate of the deceased has commenced and from the averments made in the application it is unlikely to have been concluded by the next date fixed for the hearing of the suit.
Upon the demise of a litigant before the final determination of the suit by or against him or her, where the cause of action survives the litigant, section 222 oJ The Successton Act permits the grant of letters of administration limited to the suit.
It provides:
'When lt is necessary tho,t the representqtlue ol a person deceased ls made a partg to a pending sult, and. the executo" or Petson entltled to o.dmlnlstra,tlo,r ls undble or unu)llling to d.ct, letters ol o,dmlnlstra:tion mag be gtdnted to the nomLnee of a partg in the suit, limlted lor the PurPose o.f reP"esentlng the deceased ln tho:t suit or in ang other cause or s1alt uhlch mag be commenced in the same or ln ang other court betuteen the pan4les, or anv other partles, touchl'|.g the ma]lrters ct issue ln thqt cause or sult, and untll a Jlnal decree shall be made in it, and. carried lnto comPlete executlon.'
The applicant is the widow of the deceased. She has presented the application in her capacity as a beneficiary of the estate of the deceased, and as a co-executor of his estate. She is therefore a person interested in the outcome of the suit which clearly survived the death of the said Paulino Ssedduge.
The applicant has attached to her application a notice of death indicating that he died of natural causes on 4th J:une 2021 , though yet to attach the official death certificate.
I have not found any conflict of interest between her and the deceased as regards the subject matter of the suit and the issues to be determined therein.
In the circumstances, the justice and expedience of the case demands that for the preservation of the deceased's interest in the $\mathsf{S}$ pending suit, letters of administration *ad litem*, be granted to the applicant, limited to the prosecution of the suit, and in the following terms:
- 1. The applicant is hereby substituted as the plaintiff in the main suit; and shall amend the plaint to indicate the same, and file the same within fourteen days of this ruling; - 2. The applicant is not authorised to execute any consent judgement or out of court settlement unless and until she has fully consulted with the beneficiaries of the estate, with the authority of the administrators of the estate; or until further orders are made by this court.
3. No orders as to costs.
Unhabe.
Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya
Judge
$27$ <sup>th</sup> November, 2023
15
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.