Wakilii

Kiggundu v Black Market Records (U) Limited & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 399 of 2023)

High Court · [2023] UGCOMMC 199 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to amend plaint arising from civil suit for copyright infringement
Decision
Leave to amend plaint 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

The court has discretion to allow amendments to pleadings where necessary to determine the real questions in controversy. Amendments sought before hearing should be freely allowed if they can be made without injustice to the other side. A proposed amendment cannot be rejected merely because it introduces a new claim unless the opposing party demonstrates prejudice that cannot be compensated by costs. The substitution of the 1st respondent was an inadvertent error of pleading that should not be visited on the applicant. The introduction of fraud allegations, though new, remained intricately linked with the earlier copyright infringement claim and would not substantially alter the general character of the cause of action.

Outcome

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

Facts

The applicant is a Ugandan-based singer who signed a 1-year exclusive recording artist agreement with Black Market Records LLC, a US-based company, on 12 May 2020, represented by the 2nd and 3rd respondents. Under the agreement, Black Market Records LLC was to finance recording and production of the applicant's songs in exchange for exclusive copyright. The applicant recorded only one song and elected not to renew the agreement after its expiry in May 2021. On 24 November 2022, the applicant brought a suit claiming the respondents made false copyright complaints to Youtube, leading to the platform striking down his songs and disabling his channel. The applicant's former lawyer wrongly sued Black Market Records (U) Ltd as 1st defendant instead of Black Market Records Entertainment SMC Ltd, which had actually filed a defence identifying itself as the 1st defendant. The applicant discovered that Black Market Records LLC was deregistered in 2013 and that the 2nd and 3rd respondents allegedly deceived Youtube using a purported Kenyan court order whose existence was denied by the Kenyan judiciary.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend the plaint by substituting the 1st respondent with Black Market Records Entertainment SMC Limited.
  2. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to introduce new material facts relating to fraud and illegality.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • The applicant shall file and serve its amended plaint, as proposed in the draft amended plaint, within 10 (ten) days from the date of this ruling.
  • Costs of this application shall abide by the outcome of the main suit.
  • Parties directed to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum and their respective trial bundles and witness statements by 15th December 2023.

Rules and key headnotes

Amendment of Pleadings — Discretion of Court — Test for Allowing Amendments
Courts have discretion to allow amendments to pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.
Amendment of Pleadings — Amendments Before Hearing — Liberal Approach
Amendments to pleadings sought before the hearing should be freely allowed if they can be made without injustice to the other side, and the court will not refuse an amendment simply because it introduces a new case.
Amendment of Pleadings — Introduction of New Causes of Action — Test for Prejudice
A proposed amendment cannot be rejected merely because it introduces a new claim; the burden lies heavily on the party opposing the amendment to demonstrate that the amendment will occasion such injustice that cannot be sufficiently compensated for by costs.
Amendment of Pleadings — Substitution of Parties — Inadvertent Error
Where a party retrieves and serves summons upon the correct entity which then files a defence identifying itself as the defendant, but the original plaint named the wrong entity due to inadvertent error by counsel, such error should not be visited upon the party and substitution should be allowed.
Amendment of Pleadings — Introduction of Fraud Allegations — Link to Original Cause of Action
Where an amendment introduces fraud as a new claim but the fraud alleged was committed in furtherance of the original cause of action and remains intricately linked with it, the amendment will not substantially alter the general character of the cause of action and should be allowed.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (3)

  • Mulowooza Brothers Ltd v N. Shah & Co Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2010)
  • Semanda Godfrey & Another v Lake Wamala Farm Ltd & 2 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 001 of 2021)
  • Matagala Vincent v Uganda Revenue Authority (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 25 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kiggundu v Black Market Records (U) Limited & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 399 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 199 (13 October 2023)
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.