Orute Julius v Etyang Jacob (CA NO. 002-2023) [2024] UGHC 1239 (20 December 2024)

#### **CA NO. 002-2023-ORUTE JULIUS VS ETYANG JACOB [RULING**]

### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT TORORO CIVIL APPEAL NO. 002 OF 2023 [ARISING FROM TORORO CIVIL SUIT NO-034 OF 2019]

| ETYANG JACOB::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::APPELLANT | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | VERSUS | | ORUTE JULIUS::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::RESPONDNENT |

# BEFORE: HON. DR. JUSTICE HENRY 1 KAWESA RULING

This Civil Appeal of 2023 arose from Tororo Civil Suit No. 034 of 2019 and it was filed in this Court by Appellant's advocates; M/S Musigire Stephen Kabera Advocates.

On the 17th day of November 2024 when this matter was called for hearing, the parties were absent save, Counsel Sebowa for the Respondent who prayed for a schedule to file submissions which this Court granted. This was after Court noted that the application did not have a memorandum of appeal on record. The one on record, having been cancelled with a blue pen, with no stamp of Court or endorsement by Court.

Strangely, I see on record purported submissions by the Appellant's Counsel with attachments of a purported memorandum of appeal and index of the appeal. This is very strange and unlawful.

#### **CA NO. 002-2023-ORUTE JULIUS VS ETYANG JACOB [RULING**]

Firstly, under O.43 r(i)(i), every appeal to the High Court shall be preferred in the form of a memorandum signed by the Appellant or his Advocate and presented to Court or such officer, appointed for that purpose, which was never done. O.43 r(1)(2) - then gives the form of the memorandum.

The memorandum being presented alongside the submissions without any leave of Court is illegal

I do not have to point out that this appeal was due for dismissal under O.43(r)(31) for delay to have it fixed, but in any case, it never amounted to an appeal since it has no memorandum to originate it.

In the Court of Appeal's decision in *Bakaluba and Anor versus*

## *Naluga (Election Petition Application No. 024 of 2011; UGHCEP*

*II*, dealt with failure to file a memorandum of appeal on time in that Court. Court held that:

"*according to the rules of the Court governing Parliamentary appeal, the relevant law requires a memorandum of appeal 10 be filed with the Registrar within 14 days*".

The party did not do it and Court held that;

"*the rules of' procedure were made 10 enable the expeditions disposed of elections related matters and therefore there being no application for extension of' time in Court, matters*

#### **CA NO. 002-2023-ORUTE JULIUS VS ETYANG JACOB [RULING**]

*of this nature, expedition is of essence. Delay in taking the right step in litigation al the right lime hinders the successful parties from enjoying the fruits of their judgment which was obtained in their favour.*

They dismissed the appeal with costs.

In this matter, neither a memorandum of appeal nor a decree are on record, there is therefore no appeal before this Court. This is an illegality before me and for that reason, it offends O.43 (r)(l). The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.

I so order.

Dr. Henry I Kawesa JUDGE 20/12/2024