Byamukama and Another v Buregyeya (Civil Suit 5 of 2021)
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 High Court held that pleadings drafted and filed by Eco Concrete Limited, a construction company not approved by the Law Council as a law firm, were illegal under section 70 of the Advocates Act. The court found that the company committed an offence by acting as though qualified to practice law. The actions could not be allowed to stand once the illegality was brought to the court's attention.
Outcome
Preliminary Objection Upheld
Facts
The plaintiffs filed suit on 18 January 2021. The defendant's written statement of defence and counterclaim were drafted by M/S Legal Counsel, Eco Concrete Limited and filed on 5 February 2021. When the matter came up for scheduling on 19 September 2022, counsel for the plaintiffs raised a preliminary objection to the law firm that drafted the defence. The Law Council confirmed by letter dated 16 September 2022 that Eco Concrete Limited did not appear on its lists of approved law firms for 2020, 2021, or 2022. The Uganda Registration Services Bureau confirmed Eco Concrete Limited was incorporated on 13 January 2016 as a construction firm. The defendant admitted Eco Concrete Limited was not a law firm and filed a notice of change of advocates to M/S PNK Advocates on 29 August 2022.
Issues
- Whether pleadings drafted for a party to a suit by an entity that is not an approved law firm are a nullity.
- What are the remedies available to the parties?
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (1)
- Attorney General v Major General David Tinyefunza (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.