Wakilii

Bwambale Salveri v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (Civil Suit 27 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 630 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Oral application for extension of time to file additional witness statement and correction of plaintiff's witness statement in pending civil suit
Decision
Application dismissed as premature; parties directed to comply with pre-trial directions

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

An oral application to introduce an additional witness statement and amend the plaintiff's witness statement was dismissed as premature where the parties had failed to comply with directions to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum and no scheduling conference had taken place before the trial judge.

Outcome

Application dismissed as premature; parties directed to comply with pre-trial directions

Facts

The plaintiff brought an oral application seeking extension of time to file an additional witness statement from Ndagano Selvest Akiiki and correction of the plaintiff's own witness statement to introduce a purchase agreement proving ownership of the suit land. The plaintiff argued that the additional witness had been out of the country when witness statements were due and that the omission of the purchase agreement was a correctable mistake. The defendant objected, arguing that a similar application had been overruled by the Deputy Registrar after pleadings closed and that the proposed evidence departed from the pleadings. The Deputy Registrar had previously directed parties to file trial bundles and a Joint Scheduling Memorandum by 3rd October 2024, but no Joint Scheduling Memorandum was filed and no scheduling conference had taken place before the trial judge.

Issues

  1. Whether in the circumstances the Plaintiff can introduce an additional witness in this matter at this point in the trial.
  2. Whether in the circumstances the Plaintiff can amend his statement to introduce a purchase agreement at this point in the trial.

Orders

  • The oral application of the Plaintiff is hereby dismissed as premature.
  • The Plaintiff is hereby required to comply with the Summons for Directions and liaise with the Defendant to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum before this matter is called up for Scheduling Conference.
  • Costs shall abide in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Scheduling Conference — Requirement for Joint Scheduling Memorandum — Premature Applications
An application to introduce additional evidence or amend witness statements is premature where parties have failed to comply with directions to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum and no scheduling conference has taken place before the trial judge, as such matters ought to be formally laid out in the Joint Scheduling Memorandum.
Civil Procedure — Scheduling Conference — Timing and Jurisdiction — Trial Judge
Under Order XIA Rule 7(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules read with Schedule 2, the scheduling conference takes place only before the trial judge, not before the Deputy Registrar, and arguments that scheduling has already occurred are misconceived where no such conference has been held before the trial judge.
Civil Procedure — Joint Scheduling Memorandum — Mandatory Compliance — Consequences of Non-Compliance
The Joint Scheduling Memorandum is a mandatory requirement under the Civil Procedure Rules and failure to coordinate its preparation and filing renders subsequent applications premature, as the memorandum serves to bind the parties as to how the case will proceed and prevents the court from being dragged into the merits before the actual hearing.

Legislation cited (6)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Bwambale Salveri v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (Civil Suit 27 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 630 (30 June 2025)
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.