Geoffrey gatete v william kyobe
Webnamely; Geoffrey Gatete & Another v William Kyobe SCCA No. 07 80 of 2005, Uganda Micro Enterprises Association Ltd & 2 Ors v The Micro Finance Support Centre Ltd, HCMA No. 125 of 2005, Rwabuganda Godfrey v Bitamisi Namuddu, CACA No. 23/ 2009, Kasule v Muhwezi [1992-1993] HCB 212, and Maria Odido v Barclays Bank of Uganda Ltd, HCMA …
Geoffrey gatete v william kyobe
Did you know?
WebAlhajj Abidi v Tropical Africa Bank – on substituted service and service outside the jurisdiction. Geoffrey Gatete & Others v William Kyobe SCCA No. 7/2005 – on effective service. Appeal from a summary suit where the respondent got a consent judgment against a business firm comprising the appellants. WebOlwol v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2005) [2007] UGSC 9 (16 October 2007) 16 October 2007: Apolo Hotel Corporation Ltd v Geoffrey Oryema and Ors (Civil Appeal …
WebThis legal provision has been further clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of Geoffrey Gatete and Anor v William Kyobe SCCA No. 7 of 2005 where it was pointed out that in an application of such nature what the court was required to determine is whether the defendant has shown good cause for such a leave to defend to be given. WebThe case of Geoffrey Gatete and Angela Maria Nakigonya versus William Kyobe Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005 is instructive. The judgment of the court was delivered by Mulenga JSC with concurrence of the rest of the panel of Supreme Court Judges.
WebSee also Gatete Decision of 15 July 2011, paras. 7, 10, 11. [8] Cf. Nizeyimana Trial Decision [The Prosecutor v. Ildéphonse Nizeyimana, Case No. ICTR-00-55C-T, Decision on Defence Motion for Variance of Witness Protective Measures and International Cooperation of the Government of Canada, 23 June 2011], paras. 14, 18; The Prosecutor Webexistence of the suit. This was elaborated in the case of Geoffrey Gatete and Angela Maria Nakigonya versus William Kyobe Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005 cited in …
WebGeoffrey Gatete & Anor. William Kyobe SCCA No, 7/2005 4. Re. Pritchard (1963] ALLER 873. 8.4 Time within which to serve Summons and effect of service of expired summons (Time within which to serve, who to serve, consequences of lapse of time, remedy if time for service lapses). 1. Fredrick James Junju & Anor versus Madhivani Group Ltd HCMA No ...
WebSep 21, 2007 · This appeal originates from a summary suit instituted in the High Court by William Kyobe, the above named respondent, in which he obtained a consent judgment against GMT Group, a business firm comprising three partners, namely … outwell sun valley 6 tentWebThis appeal originates from a summary suit instituted in the High Court by William Kyobe, the above named respondent, in which he obtained a consent judgment against GMT … rajasthan female literacy rateWeb16 Wegoye Joel Service of summons as enunciated by justice Mulenga in Geoffrey Gatete and Others V William Kyobe. (Civil Appeal 7 of 2005) 2007 UGSC (21st September … rajasthan financeWebOn 11th February 2014, the Court of Appeal eventually heard Civil Appeal No. 087 of 2010 ex parte. and delivered its Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 087 of 2010 on 26 th February 2014. The Court set. aside the decision of the High Court refusing to set aside the Judgment of the Kiboga Grade 1. Magistrate. outwell superior singleWebGeoffrey Gatete and Another v William Kyobe ((Civil Appeal No.7 of 2005)) [2007] UGSC 7 (21 September 2007); George Lubega & Ors v Uganda Transport Co. Ltd & Anor ((Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1987)) [1987] UGSC 2 (2 July 1987); George Mwa Larum v Zaituna Kawuma (CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 1991) [1991] UGSC 1 (9 September 1991); George … rajasthan film shooting permissionWebKyobe v Gatete and Another ((Misc. Civil Application No. 10 of 2005 )) [2006] UGSC 11 (3 August 2006); Group. Headnote and flynote. Flynote: Civil Procedure ... The application is supported by the affidavit of William Kyobe, the Applicant/Respondent. Mr. Niwandinda Kab Anthony, a law clerk in law firm of Bamwe & Co., Advocates, which represents ... outwell sun valley 8WebO.30 r 7 provides that where a summons is served in the manner provided by rule 3 of this Order upon a person having the control or management of the partnership business, no appearance by him or her shall be necessary unless he or she is a partner of the firm sued. The case of Geoffrey Gatete and Angela Maria Nakigonya versus William Kyobe ... rajasthan film tourism promotion policy-2022