Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    In Re Ranch On The Lake LTD (HCT00CCMA 537 of 2005) 2005 UGCommC 47 (24 August 2005)

    Uploaded by

    Bajole Eric

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    In Re Ranch On The Lake LTD (HCT00CCMA 537 of 2005) 2005 UGCommC 47 (24 August 2005)

    Uploaded by

    Bajole Eric
    5 views3 pages

    Original Title

    In Re Ranch on the Lake Ltd (HCT00CCMA 537 of 2005) 2005 UGCommC 47 (24 August 2005)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    5 views3 pages

    In Re Ranch On The Lake LTD (HCT00CCMA 537 of 2005) 2005 UGCommC 47 (24 August 2005)

    Uploaded by

    Bajole Eric

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA HOLDEN AT KAMPALA

    (COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION)

    HCT-00-CC-MA-0537-2005

    (Arising from HCT-00-CC-CI-0009-2005)

    IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT (CAP 110)

    AND

    IN THE MATTER OF RANCH ON THE LAKE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP)

    BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTCE FMS EGONDA-NTENDE

    RULING

    1. The applicant, Ms East African Development Bank, have applied for leave to appeal to

    the Court of Appeal against a decision of this court providing directions to the Receiver

    of the Ranch on the Lake Ltd made on the 15th day of June 2005. When this application

    came up for hearing, Mr. Nalyanya, learned counsel acting for the Receiver raised a

    preliminary objection to the effect that this application was out of time, and should

    therefore be dismissed. Mr. Adriko, learned counsel for Development Finance Company

    Uganda Limited, joined in this objection.

    2. Mr. Kabatsi, learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that this application is governed

    by Order 40 Rules 1(2) & (4) and Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Rules, both of which

    are silent on time. As a result this court should turn to Section 80 of the Civil Procedure

    Act which provides 30 days within which appeals may be filed. Mr. Kabatsi further

    indicated that he was aware the Court of Appeal Rules provided for a time period of 14
    days but this was extendible. And as the intended appeal involved very important

    questions of law, this application ought to be heard, and the appeal filed.

    3. Rule 39(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules provides,

    “where an appeal lies with leave of the High Court, application for leave shall be

    made informally at the time when the decision against which it is so desired to

    appeal is given; or failing that application, or if the Court so orders, by notice of

    motion within fourteen days of the decision.”

    4. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act provides for the time within which appeals may be

    lodged, and provides for an opportunity to seek extension of time in case a party is out of

    time. It directs that such decision for extension of time will be made by the appellate

    court. It states,

    “(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in any other law, every appeal

    shall be entered— (a) within

    thirty days of the date of the decree or order of the court; or (b) within seven

    days of the date of the order of a registrar, as the case may be,

    appealed against: Provided that the appellate

    court may for good cause admit an appeal though the period of limitation

    prescribed by this section has elapsed.”

    5. It is for the appellate court to grant extension of time for filing an appeal in respect of

    those appeals that are governed by Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act, and these are

    appeals as of right without leave of the court of first instance. It is not for the court of first

    instance to make this decision.

    6. The applicable rule here is Rule 39(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules. It requires that

    application for leave to appeal out of time, should be made within 14 days of the decision

    intended to be appealed from. In this case the decision intended to be appealed against

    2
    was made on the 15th June 2005. This application was lodged into this court on 11th July

    2005, more than 14 days since the decision intended to be appealed against was made.

    This application is time barred.

    7. Mr. Kabatsi submitted that I should disregard this rule suggesting that there are numerous

    cases where courts have done so. Unfortunately he did not refer me to a particular case. I

    am not sure that it would be prudent for the High Court not to follow the rules of the

    Court of Appeal. I can only say I am not persuaded that this is a viable option for this

    court.

    8. Accordingly I find that this application was made out of time and it is accordingly

    dismissed with costs.

    Dated at Kampala this 24th day of August 2005.

    FMS Egonda-Ntende
    Judge

    You might also like