Wakilii

Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited & 2 Ors v Ayebazibwe (Miscellaneous Application No. 1187 of 2016)

High Court · [2017] UGCOMMC 76 · 2017 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to file witness statement out of time in civil proceedings arising from Civil Suit No. 165 of 2012
Decision
Witness statement readmitted and validated; matter remitted for continuation of defence 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 the discretion to extend time for filing witness statements under Order 51 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules should be exercised in the interests of justice. Special circumstances existed where a key witness was a magistrate working upcountry and was difficult to access. The witness statement of Jacqueline Kagoya, previously struck out for being filed late, was readmitted and validated, with the court ordering that no additional statements be made to it.

Outcome

Witness statement readmitted and validated; matter remitted for continuation of defence hearing

Facts

The applicants sought leave to file a witness statement of Jacqueline Kagoya out of time. On 30 October 2013, the court directed both parties to file witness statements by 21 November 2013 for hearing on 17 December 2013. Neither party complied. The court then ordered witness statements to be filed by 23 December 2013 without fail. During subsequent hearings, the plaintiff gave evidence, but the defendants still had not filed witness statements. On 17 May 2016, the court ruled that witness statements filed after the plaintiff's testimony would be given trifling weight, but extended time to 10 June 2016 without fail. The applicants filed Jacqueline Kagoya's witness statement on 1 July 2016 without first obtaining leave of court. On 5 October 2016, the statement was struck out for being filed out of time without leave. The applicants then brought this application, arguing that Kagoya had been appointed as a magistrate working upcountry and was difficult to contact, making it hard to obtain her witness statement within the court's timelines.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant leave to file the applicants' witness statements out of time.
  2. Whether the court should readmit the witness statement of Jacqueline Kagoya that was struck out on grounds of being filed out of time.
  3. Whether the applicants, having failed to comply with prior court orders, were in contempt and could be heard in the application.
  4. Whether there were sufficient special circumstances to justify the court exercising its discretion to enlarge time under Order 51 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Orders

  • The application to extend time within which to file the witness statement of Jacqueline Kagoya is allowed.
  • The witness statement of Jacqueline Kagoya previously struck off the record is readmitted and validated as having been filed in time.
  • No additional statement shall be made to the said witness statement.
  • The witness statement shall be made available to all parties including the court as originally filed.
  • Costs of the application to be borne by the applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Extension of Time — Discretion of Court — Special Circumstances
The court has discretion under Order 51 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules to enlarge time for doing any act or taking any proceedings even where the application is made after the expiration of the time appointed, and the court should exercise this discretion considering the interests of justice and whether special circumstances exist.
Civil Procedure — Witness Statements — Late Filing — Special Circumstances — Witness Availability
Where a witness is a magistrate working upcountry and is difficult to access, this constitutes a special circumstance justifying the exercise of the court's discretion to extend time for filing that witness's statement, notwithstanding prior failures to comply with court orders.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Right to be Heard in Related Application
Where a court order merely strikes out a witness statement as not properly before the court for being filed without leave out of time, an applicant is not barred from filing a formal application to extend time, and such application must be considered on its merits notwithstanding prior non-compliance with court orders.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (6)

  • Housing Finance Bank Ltd v Musisi (Miscellaneous Application No. 158 of 2010)
  • Amrit Goyal v Harichand Goyal & 3 Ors (Civil Application No. 109 of 2004)
  • Kasirye Byaruhanga & Co Advocates v Uganda Development Bank (Civil Application No. 2 of 1997)
  • UTEX Industries Ltd v Attorney General (Civil Application No. 52 of 1995)
  • Semande v Uganda [1999] 1 EA 321
  • Andiazi v Republic [1967] EA 813

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited & 2 Ors v Ayebazibwe (Miscellaneous Application No. 1187 of 2016) [2017] UGCommC 76 (1 June 2017)
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.