Omony v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 579 of 2016) [2023] UGHCCD 1 (13 January 2023)
Court
HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Case number
Civil Suit No. 579 of 2016
Judge
Nambayo, J
The High Court dismissed a wrongful-death suit after finding the plaintiff lacked locus standi under the Law Reform Act because he was not a qualifying family member or representative.
Mutenye Moses v UMEME Limited (EDT COMPLAINT 13 of 2017) [2018] UGEDT 6 (12 November 2018)
Court
Electricity Disputes Tribunal
Case number
EDT COMPLAINT 13 of 2017
Judges
Charles Okoth Owor - Chairperson Electricity Disputes Tribunal, Anaclet Turyakira, - Vice Chair Person Electricty Disputes Tribunal, Eng. Dr. Moses Musaazi - Member Electricity Disputes Tribunal
The Tribunal determined that while it has jurisdiction to hear matters relating to the electricity sector, including those involving allegations of negligence in electricity distribution resulting in death, the right to bring a claim for wrongful death is a statutory cause of action created by the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, Cap 79. The Supreme Court in UEB v G.W. Musoke established that such claims must be expressly pleaded as being brought under the Act. The applicant's failure to do so rendered the complaint incompetent, as the statutory foundation for the cause of action wa…
Okeng Washington v Attorney General (Civil Suit No.16 Of 2004) (Civil Suit No.16 of 2004) [2008] UGHC 78 (25 February 2008)
Court
High Court of Uganda
Case number
Civil Suit No.16 of 2004
The court found that, although the plaintiff did not specifically plead his capacity, the plaint as a whole indicated he was a family member of the deceased and thus entitled to sue. However, the suit was filed more than twelve months after the death of the deceased, contrary to section 6(3) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, Cap. 79. No disability or exception was pleaded to bring the action within time. The court held that statutory limitation periods are mandatory and not subject to the Limitation Act, Cap. 80, due to section 32 of that Act. As a result, the suit was time-ba…