Wakilii

Arconsult Architects v A. Bauman Uganda Limited (Misc. Appl. No. 42 of 1994)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 135 · 1994 Preliminary Objection Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection in an application for extension of time to file Notice of Appeal
Decision
Preliminary objection dismissed; main application to proceed to hearing

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The court held that an advocate may swear an affidavit and appear as counsel in the same matter where the affidavit deals with non-contentious or formal matters. Under regulation 8 of the Advocates (Professional Conduct) Regulations 1977, the prohibition on dual roles applies only where the advocate will give evidence on contentious matters. The preliminary objection was overruled.

Outcome

Preliminary objection dismissed; main application to proceed to hearing

Facts

The applicant sought an extension of time to file a Notice of Appeal under section 37 of the Judicature Act. Mr. Kateera, representing the applicant, swore an affidavit in support stating that he had given money to his clerk Mathiak Tumusabe to pay court fees for the Notice of Appeal, but discovered the fees were not paid and the Notice was not properly filed. He dismissed the clerk. During the hearing, the respondent's counsel raised a preliminary objection that Mr. Kateera, having sworn the affidavit as a witness, could not also act as advocate in the same matter. The respondent did not file any affidavit disputing the facts sworn by Mr. Kateera.

Issues

  1. Whether an advocate who has sworn an affidavit in support of an application can also appear as counsel in the same matter.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection overruled.
  • Court to proceed to hear the main application.

Rules and key headnotes

Advocates' Professional Conduct — Dual Role as Witness and Counsel — Non-Contentious Matters
An advocate may swear an affidavit and appear as counsel in the same matter where the affidavit relates to non-contentious or formal matters that do not affect the real issues in the main suit.
Advocates' Professional Conduct Regulations — Regulation 8 — Proviso for Formal and Non-Contentious Matters
Regulation 8 of the Advocates (Professional Conduct) Regulations 1977 prohibits an advocate from appearing where he will be required as a witness, but the proviso permits giving evidence on formal or non-contentious matters in interlocutory and small applications.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Yunusu Ismail t/a Bombo City Stores v Alex Kamukamu and another t/a Ok Bazaar (Civil Appeal No. 13/5 of 1987)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Arconsult Architects v A. Bauman Uganda Limited (Misc. Appl. No. 42 of 1994) [1994] UGHC 135 (19 May 1994)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.