Wakilii

Libyan Arab Uganda Bank For Foreign Trade & Development & Anor v Adam Vassiliadis (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1985)

Court of Appeal · [1986] UGCA 6 · 1986 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from High Court judgment ordering specific performance and damages
Decision
Judgment set aside and retrial de novo ordered before a different judge

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 of Appeal held that the trial was not conducted in an atmosphere conducive to a fair hearing. The trial judge intervened during cross-examination causing counsel to withdraw, the case then proceeded ex parte, and there was insufficient evidence to sustain the findings. The court also held the 1st appellant was not shown to be a party to the sale contract, and that documentary extracts relied on were valueless hearsay. On the bias allegation, mere conjecture without reasonable evidence is insufficient. The court further held it has no power to inquire into a judge's mental soundness or initiate removal proceedings, that being the province of a constitutional tribunal. Appeal allowed and a retrial de novo before a different judge ordered.

Outcome

Judgment set aside and retrial de novo ordered before a different judge

Facts

The 1st appellant bank was the registered proprietor of a property at Plot 152 Rashid Khamis Road, Kampala, which had been sold and transferred to it by the 2nd appellant in 1977. The respondent claimed that in October 1980 the 1st appellant, acting through the 2nd appellant, agreed to sell the property to him and that he paid the full purchase price, but that the 1st appellant refused to transfer title. The 1st appellant denied entering any contract of sale; the 2nd appellant admitted selling as beneficial owner on his own behalf, denying agency. The High Court ordered specific performance against the 1st appellant plus arrears of rent and general damages. At trial, following the trial judge's rebuke of appellants' counsel during cross-examination, counsel withdrew and the case proceeded ex parte. The appellants appealed, alleging the judge's mental illness, misconduct and bias denied them a fair trial, and challenging findings on the contract and the admission of privileged and hearsay evidence.

Issues

  1. Whether counsel's affidavit as to events at trial could be admitted as part of the record of appeal.
  2. Whether failure to frame issues before trial vitiated the proceedings.
  3. Whether the trial judge erred in holding the 1st appellant was a party to the oral contract of sale.
  4. Whether communications between advocate and client were privileged and inadmissible under section 124 of the Evidence Act.
  5. Whether hearsay documentary extracts were wrongly admitted without the maker being called.
  6. Whether the trial judge's misconduct, intervention and alleged bias denied the appellants a fair trial warranting a retrial.
  7. Whether the Court of Appeal may inquire into a trial judge's mental soundness or initiate removal proceedings.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Judgment and orders of the court below set aside.
  • Retrial de novo ordered before a different judge.
  • Costs in this court and in the court below to be costs in the cause.
  • Directive that a copy of the record of appeal and judgment be furnished to the Attorney General, drawing attention to Article 85(3) of the Constitution.

Rules and key headnotes

Appeals — Record of Appeal — Admissibility of counsel's affidavit under Rule 85
An appellant must support the grounds of appeal, as far as facts are concerned, from the record of appeal as defined by Rule 85; an affidavit by counsel as to events in the court below does not form part of the record and cannot be introduced except by application to adduce additional evidence under Rule 29.
Fair Trial — Bias — Real likelihood of bias — Standard of proof
An allegation of bias must be supported by reasonable evidence showing a real likelihood of bias assessed by the impression given to a reasonable person; mere surmise, conjecture or flimsy suspicion is insufficient, and a party alleging bias should object at trial and, if overruled, continue and raise it on appeal.
Fair Trial — Judicial intervention — Striking too soon — Retrial
Excessive or ill-timed intervention by a trial judge that prevents a party from properly presenting its case may amount to misconduct denying a fair trial and, where insufficient primary facts have been elicited, justifies ordering a retrial before another judge.
Documentary Evidence — Hearsay — Extracts of letters where maker not called
Extracts of letters produced by a witness who did not author them, whose makers are not called to testify, are valueless hearsay and cannot support a finding of fact even if formally admitted.
Legal Professional Privilege — Section 124 Evidence Act — Requirement to claim privilege
Legal professional privilege under section 124 of the Evidence Act must be founded on evidence establishing the advocate-client relationship and be claimed at trial; it cannot be raised for the first time on appeal absent supporting evidence and where consent may have been given.
Judicial Officers — Removal for infirmity — Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal
The Court of Appeal has no power to inquire into or initiate proceedings for the removal of a judge on grounds of mental infirmity, that being the exclusive province of a tribunal appointed under the Constitution; but where infirmity or misconduct is said to have denied a fair trial the court retains jurisdiction to remedy the resulting miscarriage of justice.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (21)

  • A.P.C. Lobo and Another v. Saleh Salim Dhiyebi & Others (1961) E.A. 223
  • Ex parte Firth (1882) 19 Ch. D.419
  • Parkinson v. Parkinson (1947) 63 T.L.R. 439
  • Thomson v. Andrews (1968) 1 WLR 778
  • Metropolitan Properties Co. F.G.C. Ltd. v. Lannon (1969) 1 QB 577
  • R.V. Justices of Queens Court (1908) 2 IR 282
  • Tumaini v. Republic (1972) E.A. 441
  • R. V. Sussex Justices Ex parte Mcarthy (1924) 1 KB 256
  • Reg. v. Cambone Justices, Ex parte Pearce (1955) QB 41
  • Reg. v. Nailsworth Licensing Justices ex parte Bird (1953) 2 WLR 1046, (1953) 2 All E.R. 652
  • Reg. v. Huggins (1895) 1 QB 563
  • Lord Mayor & Co. of Leeds v. Ryder and others (1907) A.C. 420
  • Brassington v. Brassington (1961) All E.R. 988
  • Badcock v. Middlesex County Council, March 15, 1960, The Times March 16 (1960)
  • Jones v. National Coal Board (1957) 2 QB 55
  • Patel v. Joshi (1952) 19 E.A.C.A. 42
  • Yuill v. Yuill (1945) page 15, 61 T.L.R. 176, (1945) All E.R. 183
  • Fletcher v. London & North Western Railway Co. (1892) 1 QB 122
  • Allen v. Francis (1914) 3 KB 1065
  • Fatehali Manji v. Republic (1966) E.A. 343
  • Ex parte Lloyed (1822 Mont 70, 72n)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Libyan Arab Uganda Bank For Foreign Trade & Development & Anor v Adam Vassiliadis (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1985) [1986] UGCA 6 (12 June 1986)
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.