Bugembe Edward v Nkalubo Aaron (Miscellaneous Application 48 of 2026)
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
Held that where a lawyer signs an affidavit on behalf of a deponent without the deponent being physically present before the Commissioner for Oaths, the affidavit is invalid and must be struck off. An application cannot stand without a valid supporting affidavit. The application for mandatory injunction was dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Outcome
Application dismissed on preliminary objection; supporting affidavit struck off as invalid
Facts
The applicant sought a mandatory injunction to compel the respondent to restore suit land (Kibanja on Busiro Block 383 Plot 20295) to its status quo, alleging the respondent had violated a temporary injunction by constructing a perimeter wall, grading land, and destroying graveyards. The respondent opposed, claiming he had been in possession since 1996 through inheritance and that construction predated the injunction. During cross-examination, the applicant admitted he did not sign the supporting affidavit, affidavit in rejoinder, or supplementary affidavit — his lawyer signed them on his behalf. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the affidavits were incurably defective for not being properly sworn.
Issues
- Whether the supporting affidavits were properly sworn and commissioned in accordance with the law.
- Whether the application for mandatory injunction could stand in the absence of a valid supporting affidavit.
Orders
- Supporting affidavit struck off the record.
- Preliminary objection upheld.
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Judicature Act s.37
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.3
- Civil Procedure Rules O.41 r.1(a)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.41 r.2(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.41 r.9
- Oaths Act s.6
- Commissioner for Oaths (Advocates) Act s.5
- Commissioner for Oaths (Advocates) Act s.6
Cases cited (3)
- Nakanjako Teopista and Another v Tamale Francis and 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 124 of 2022)
- Kakooza John Baptist v Electoral Commission and Another (Election Petition Appeal No. 11 of 2007)
- Mohammed Majyambere v Bhakresa Khalil (Miscellaneous Application No. 727 of 2011)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.