Wakilii

George Patrick Mwebaze & oers v Saidi Kwinini (HCT-05-CV-CA-011-2005 ) (HCT-05-CV-CA-011-2005)

High Court · [2005] UGHC 105 · 2005 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Mbarara District Land Tribunal decision granting leave to amend statement of claim
Decision
Leave to amend annulled; matter remains before District Land Tribunal for respondent to properly seek leave to amend if desired

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

Court held that leave to amend pleadings was wrongly granted where no written proposed amendment was submitted to the opposing party for consideration before the tribunal's ruling. An oral application without specification of the amendment is procedurally irregular. Until a proposed amendment is put in writing and the other side has opportunity to make submissions, any indication of willingness to allow amendment must be provisional only. The leave to amend granted by the District Land Tribunal was annulled.

Outcome

Leave to amend annulled; matter remains before District Land Tribunal for respondent to properly seek leave to amend if desired

Facts

The respondent made an oral application before the Mbarara District Land Tribunal seeking leave to amend his statement of claim. On 7 December 2004, the Tribunal granted leave to amend without requiring the respondent to produce a written proposed amendment or give the appellants an opportunity to respond to the specific amendments sought. The appellants appealed on grounds that the tribunal erred in entertaining an application without a proposed amendment, allowing amendment in general terms, and allowing an amendment that introduced a new cause of action.

Issues

  1. Whether the tribunal erred in law to entertain an application that had no proposed amendment.
  2. Whether the tribunal erred in law to allow an amendment in general terms.
  3. Whether the tribunal erred in law to allow an amendment that introduced a new cause of action.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Leave to amend granted by the District Land Tribunal on 7 December 2004 is annulled.
  • Respondent should formally seek leave to amend his pleadings before the Tribunal if he is still so inclined.
  • Costs of the appeal to the appellants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Procedure for Granting Leave
Before a court grants leave to amend pleadings, the proposed amendment must be put in writing and submitted to the opposing party, who must be given an opportunity to make submissions on it. Any indication by the court of willingness to allow an amendment before these steps are completed is provisional only and not a final ruling.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Grant in General Terms
It is procedurally irregular for a tribunal to grant leave to amend pleadings in general terms without the applicant making manifest the specific proposed amendment. Granting leave to amend without specification of what is to be amended amounts to giving a blank cheque and is improper.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Interference with Discretion
An appellate court will not interfere with the exercise of a trial court's discretion to allow or refuse amendments to pleadings unless satisfied that the court applied a wrong principle or that manifest injustice would result.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Abdul Karim Khan v Mohamed Roshan [1965] EA 289
  • Hall v Meyrick [1957] 2 All ER 722

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

George Patrick Mwebaze & oers v Saidi Kwinini (HCT-05-CV-CA-011-2005 ) (HCT-05-CV-CA-011-2005) [2005] UGHC 105 (31 May 2005)
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.