Wakilii

Crane Bank Limited v Salongo Rashid Kiwanuka (Miscellaneous Application No. 1172 of 2016)

High Court · [2017] UGCOMMC 296 · 2017 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to amend written statement of defence arising from civil suit for release of blocked account funds
Decision
Leave to amend defence granted; matter to proceed to trial on amended pleadings

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 leave to amend pleadings should be granted where the amendment is necessary to determine the real questions in controversy, is made in good faith, and occasions no injustice to the opposite party that cannot be compensated by costs. Where an applicant seeks to add particulars of impersonation that were not within its knowledge at the time of filing, and the matter has not proceeded far into trial, the amendment should be allowed. The application was allowed with costs to abide the cause.

Outcome

Leave to amend defence granted; matter to proceed to trial on amended pleadings

Facts

The respondent/plaintiff brought suit against Crane Bank claiming release of blocked account funds totalling UGX 57,320,830 received from UNRA. The bank defended on grounds that the respondent was impersonating his deceased father, Salongo Rashid Kiwanuka, and had used forged identification documents with his own photographs and thumbprint to open the account. The bank advised the respondent to obtain letters of administration but he instead instituted the suit in the name of the deceased. The bank then applied to amend its defence to include additional particulars of impersonation which had come to its knowledge after filing, including evidence that the respondent had registered a telephone number in 2013 using the name Lubanga Ahamada, contradicting his sworn statements that he had been known as Salongo Rashid Kiwanuka since 1964.

Issues

  1. Whether the application meets the criteria for the amendment of pleadings

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Leave granted to amend paragraph 5 of the written statement of defence to include particulars of impersonation.
  • Costs to abide the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Principles — Discretion of Court
Under Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has wide discretion to allow amendment to pleadings of a party at any stage of proceedings on such terms as may be just, and such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Guiding Principles
The guiding principles for amendment of pleadings are: (1) the amendment should not occasion injustice to the opposite party; (2) the amendment should be granted if it is in the interest of justice and to avoid multiplicity of suits; (3) it should be made in good faith; and (4) it must not be expressly or impliedly prohibited by law.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Purpose of Courts — Deciding Rights Not Punishing Mistakes
The object of courts is to decide the rights of the parties, and not to punish them for mistakes they make in the conduct of their cases. Courts do not exist for the sake of discipline, but for the sake of deciding matters in controversy. Any error or mistake which is not fraudulent or intended to overreach should be corrected if it can be done without injustice to the other party.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — No Injustice Where Costs Can Compensate
Amendments to pleadings sought before hearing should be freely allowed if they can be made without injustice to the other side, and there is no injustice if the other party can be compensated by costs. Leave to amend should be granted where no injustice will be caused to the opposite party which cannot be cured by costs or other remedy.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Additional Information to Strengthen Defence
Where an applicant seeks to add particulars that were not within its knowledge at the time of filing the original pleading, and the information is necessary to determine the real question in controversy, the amendment should be allowed. An applicant is not required to be deprived of an opportunity to present additional evidence that clarifies its defence, provided the amendment is made in good faith and the matter has not proceeded far into trial.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (12)

  • Col. Kiiza Besigye v Y K Museveni (Presidential Petition A2001)
  • GASO Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Obene [1990-1994] EA 88 (SCU)
  • Steeds V Steeds [1889] 22 QBD 537 at 542
  • Samwiri Mussa v Rose Achen (1975) HCB 297
  • Eastern Bakery v Castelino [1958] 1 EA 461
  • Mulowoza and Brothers v N Shah and Another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2010)
  • Lea Associates Limited v Bunga Hill House Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 348 of 2008)
  • Edward Kabugo Sentongo v Bank of Baroda (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 0203 of 2007)
  • Coffee Marketing Board Ltd v Fred Kizito (1992-93) HCB 175
  • Gaso Transporter Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
  • Copper vs. Smith [1884] 25 CHD 700
  • General Manager EAR&HA v Theirstein [1958] EA 354

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Crane Bank Limited v Salongo Rashid Kiwanuka (Miscellaneous Application No. 1172 of 2016) [2017] UGCommC 296 (15 March 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.