John Kibyami v Mission & Relief Transport Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 236 of 2006)
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 the inclusion of the word 'Ltd' in the defendant's name was a mere misnomer constituting a drafting error. Where a reasonable person reading all documents would entertain no doubt as to the correct party to be sued, the error may be corrected by amendment without element of surprise. Application to amend the plaint allowed.
Outcome
Amendment allowed; matter to proceed to hearing on the merits
Facts
The plaintiff filed a commercial suit against 'Mission and Relief Transport Ltd', described as a limited liability company incorporated in Uganda. At the scheduling conference, defendant's counsel informed the court that two companies existed with similar names: Mission and Relief Transport Ltd (a Ugandan company) and Mission and Relief Transport (a Netherlands company registered in Uganda as a foreign company under Companies Act s.370). The hire agreement attached to the plaint showed the contract was with 'Mission & Relief Transport' (without 'Ltd'), signed for 'Mission & Relief Transport Uganda' with a stamp reading 'Mission and Relief Transport, Great Lakes Region Office'. Plaintiff's counsel applied to amend the plaint by deleting the word 'limited' from the defendant's name. Defendant's counsel objected, arguing this constituted substitution of parties and moved to strike out the suit under Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.29.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend the plaint by deleting the word 'limited' from the defendant's name.
Orders
- Application to amend the plaint allowed.
- The word 'Limited' to be struck out from the defendant's name.
- Costs of the application to be in the cause of the suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Companies Act s.370
- Companies Act Part X
- Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.29
Cases cited (2)
- JB Kohli & Others v Bachulal Popatlal (1964) EA 219
- Edward Seninde v Fred Luwaga (1995) IV KALR 149
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.