Substantive rights

Biiso v Tibamwenda ((Civil Appeal No. DR. MFP. 5/89 )) [1990] UGHC 8 (16 March 1990);


Search Summary: 

The respondent raised a preliminary appeal against the appeal on the basis that the appeal did not confirm with the law since it wasn’t against a decree nor order of court.

Headnote and Holding: 

Court considered whether the appeal was in conformity with the requirement in section 232 (1)(c) which required that; an appeal shall lie from a decree and orders passed or made in appeal by chief Magistrate with leave of the chief magistrate of high court to high court.

Court defined a decree as a formal expression of adjudication. Court added that an appeal to the high court must be against a decree which must be extracted and filed. That failure to extract a decree went to the root of the jurisdiction of the court and rendered the appeal incompetent.

Court accordingly held that since no decree had been extracted the appeal was incompetent. Court upheld the respondent’s objection and dismissed the appeal for non compliance with the law.


Subscribe to RSS - Substantive rights