Wakilii

Engineering Tradelinks Co. Ltd v DFCU Bank Ltd (Civil Suit No. 593 of 2012)

High Court · [2015] UGCOMMC 25 · 2015 Preliminary Objections Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on preliminary objections raised by defendant at commencement of trial
Decision
Matter to proceed to trial on the merits

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 overruled preliminary objections raised by the defendant challenging the disclosure of a cause of action. The parties had previously consented to deposit of an admitted sum and trial on the disputed balance. Raising objections after that consent amounted to reneging on the consent order. Witness statements would not be expunged as the defendant would have opportunity to cross-examine, and leave for the expert witness had been granted during scheduling.

Outcome

Matter to proceed to trial on the merits

Facts

The plaintiff borrowed money from the defendant bank under an overdraft facility governed by contract. A dispute arose regarding the interest charged and outstanding balance. On 8 November 2013, the parties consented that the plaintiff deposit UGX 217,796,294 being the admitted sum, and that the disputed figure would be subjected to trial. The plaintiff filed witness statements including an expert witness. At the commencement of trial on 29 January 2015, defendant's counsel raised preliminary objections that the plaint disclosed no cause of action, that certain paragraphs of witness statements should be expunged as relating to property sale before another court, and that the expert witness statement was inadmissible for lack of prior leave.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action.
  2. Whether paragraphs of witness statements relating to property sale should be expunged.
  3. Whether the expert witness statement should be expunged for lack of prior leave of court.

Orders

  • Preliminary objections overruled.
  • Costs of the day awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Expert witness statement to remain on record.
  • Witness statements not to be expunged.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Objection Raised After Consent Order
Where parties have entered into a consent order agreeing to proceed to trial on disputed issues, raising a preliminary objection that the plaint discloses no cause of action amounts to reneging on the consent order and will be overruled.
Civil Procedure — Witness Statements — Application to Expunge Paragraphs
An application to expunge paragraphs from witness statements before trial is premature. The proper course is to allow cross-examination, and if the evidence is found irrelevant, the court will deal with it according to law during or after trial.
Civil Procedure — Expert Evidence — Leave of Court
Where leave to call an expert witness has been granted during scheduling and the witness statement filed within court-ordered timelines, an objection at trial that leave was not obtained will be dismissed.

Cases cited (1)

  • Tororo Cement Co v Fatina International (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2001)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Engineering Tradelinks Co. Ltd v DFCU Bank Ltd (Civil Suit No. 593 of 2012) [2015] UGCommC 25 (30 January 2015)
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.