Matovu Charles v Kibuuka Lawrence and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 984 of 2025)

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.

Holding

Held that ex parte orders made in the absence of a party and based on verbal agreements allegedly reached during mediation, without a consent judgment filed in court, are irregular and offend principles of natural justice. Mediation discussions cannot be used against a party unless embodied in a consent settlement duly filed and sealed. Striking out an expert report solely because it was not court-appointed, rather than on admissibility grounds, prematurely excludes relevant evidence and prejudices the party's defence. Orders set aside.

Outcome

Ex parte orders set aside; expert report reinstated for determination at trial

Facts

The 1st and 2nd Respondents instituted Civil Suit No. 640 of 2014 against the Applicant claiming land and breach of contract based on an alleged agreement. The matter was referred to mediation, which failed. On 22 October 2021, in the absence of the Applicant and his counsel, the trial judge made orders based on information about what transpired during mediation, including that parties had agreed to submit the disputed agreement to a handwriting expert at shared cost. The court ordered that a court-appointed expert examine the document and that the Applicant pay the expert's costs. The Applicant later obtained his own forensic handwriting report, which the court struck out on grounds it violated the earlier order requiring a court-appointed expert. The Applicant applied to set aside both the ex parte orders and the striking out of his expert report.

Issues

1. Whether the ex parte orders granted on 22nd October 2021 were irregular or improperly issued.
2. Whether the striking out of the Applicant's handwriting expert's report was proper.

Orders

• The ex parte orders issued on 22nd October 2021 in HCCS No. 640 of 2014 be and are hereby set aside.
• The order striking out the Applicant's handwriting expert report from the trial bundle is also set aside and its admissibility shall be determined during trial.
• Costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (3)

• Judicature Act s.37
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1, 2 & 3

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