Uganda Case Law

Uganda Telecom Limited v Tanzanite Corporation

Uganda Telecom Limited v Tanzanite Corporation (Civil Application 91 of 2003) [2003] UGCA 17 (12 September 2003)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 91 of 2003

Judge

Byamugisha, JA

The court found that the applicant was not responsible for the delay, which was caused by counsel's inadvertent mistake. The discretion to enlarge time is unfettered and should be exercised to prevent injustice, especially where the party seeking extension was not at fault. The respondent will not suffer any injustice if time is enlarged, and substantive justice requires that parties are not driven from the judgment seat without being heard. The court therefore exercised its discretion to extend the time and validate the notice of cross-appeal filed out of time, awarding costs of the applicat…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Cross Appeal
• Court Discretion
• Advocate Blunder
• Substantive Justice

Omar v Abdalla

Omar v Abdalla (civil Application No. 54 of 2000) [2002] UGCA 21 (6 March 2002)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

civil Application No. 54 of 2000

Judge

Okello, JA

The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to extend time for filing and serving a notice of appeal, holding that the delay stemmed from counsel’s lack of diligence and no sufficient reason was shown.

• Extension Of Time
• Notice Of Appeal
• Advocate Blunder
• Judicial Discretion
• Extension-of-time
• Notice-of-appeal

Sadrudin Dhamji Sayani v Mpresse Nsubuga

Sadrudin Dhamji Sayani v Mpresse Nsubuga (Civil Application 10 of 1995) [1995] UGSC 34 (11 May 1995)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 10 of 1995

Judge

J.W.N.Tsekooko, JSC

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient reason for not lodging the notice of appeal within the prescribed time. The explanations provided, including the court vacation and the need for a typed judgment, were not persuasive, especially given the simplicity of the notice of appeal and the applicant's presence at judgment delivery. The absence of supporting documents, such as extracts of the judgment or the letter of repossession, further weakened the application. The court reaffirmed that blunders by an advocate do not automatically justify extension of time and that each case must be as…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Notice Of Appeal
• Expropriated Properties Act
• Advocate Blunder
• Repossession Certificate