Wakilii

Mandevia v Standard Bank of South Africa, Limited (Civil Case No. 19 of 1943)

East African Court of Appeal · [1944] EACA 20 · 1944 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for inspection of documents in civil suit for employment benefits
Decision
Application for inspection of document allowed with costs

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 a plaintiff is entitled to inspection of a document if it would assist him either directly or indirectly in the suit, regardless of whether he was a party to the document or whether its contents had been communicated to him. A document purporting to show regulations in force at the time of engagement is not irrelevant to a suit for employment benefits even if those regulations were subsequently altered.

Outcome

Application for inspection of document allowed with costs

Facts

The plaintiff was employed by the defendant bank from September 1924 to 3rd December 1942. He sued for 16 months' half pay in lieu of leave not granted, Sh. 4,000 in lieu of return passages to India, Sh. 2,000 in lieu of 20 weeks' accrued local leave, and Sh. 7,643/27 in respect of gratuity. The plaintiff demanded inspection of a document dated 23rd January 1922 marked 'Private Official' written by the Superintendent of the defendant's East African branches to bank managers, which purported to set out regulations regarding overseas leave conditions and pensions of staff that came into force on 1st January 1922. The defendant bank refused inspection on grounds of irrelevance, claiming the document was sent only for managers' guidance, was not communicated to the plaintiff, did not form part of his contract, and had been subsequently altered.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to inspection of a document marked 'Private Official' which purports to set out regulations regarding leave conditions and pensions of staff.
  2. Whether a document is relevant for inspection purposes if it was not communicated to the plaintiff and did not form part of the contract of employment.

Orders

  • Application for inspection granted.
  • Costs awarded against the defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Discovery and Inspection — Relevance Test for Document Inspection
A party is entitled to inspection of a document if it would assist him either directly or indirectly in the suit, regardless of whether he was a party to the document or whether its contents had been communicated to him.
Employment & Labour — Contract of Service — Relevance of Internal Regulations to Employment Claims
A document purporting to show regulations in force at the time of an employee's engagement is not irrelevant to a suit for employment benefits, even if those regulations have been subsequently altered, added to, or revoked, particularly where there was no written contract of service.
Evidence — Documentary Evidence — Inspection of Private Official Documents
The fact that a document is marked 'Private Official' and was not authoritatively communicated to a party does not render it irrelevant or privileged from inspection if it relates to matters in issue in the suit.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mandevia v Standard Bank of South Africa, Limited (Civil Case No. 19 of 1943) [1944] EACA 20 (1 January 1944)
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.