Moses K. Katuramu v Attorney General and Another (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1985)

Observed later treatment

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

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that although a plaint does not include a reply, a reply filed in answer to a defence forms part of the plaintiff's pleadings and must be read together with the plaint. Where a plaintiff omits the grounds of exemption from limitation in the plaint but states them in a reply (here, that he was in prison confinement), the court should consider that reply, which may supplement or cure a deficiency in the plaint. The trial judge erred in ignoring the reply and striking out the torts of assault and unlawful arrest under Order 7 rule 11(d). Courts should ensure justice and pay less respect to technicalities.

Outcome

Appeal allowed; the plaintiff's claims for assault and unlawful arrest reinstated

Facts

The appellant was arrested on 4 February 1982 on the instructions of the second respondent and detained in prison by the first respondent until his release on 14 July 1983. Within one year of his release he filed an action against both respondents for assault, unlawful arrest and unlawful detention. The first respondent filed a defence on 5 October 1984 without pleading limitation. The second respondent filed a defence on 28 September 1984 pleading that the action was time-barred. On 1 October 1984 the appellant filed a reply to the second respondent's defence stating that he had been in prison confinement and did not know whether there were lawful reasons justifying his arrest and detention. The trial judge struck out the torts of assault and unlawful arrest as time-barred, holding that the plaintiff had not complied with Order 7 rule 6 by showing grounds of exemption in the plaint, and ignoring the reply.

Issues

1. Whether a plaintiff's reply to a written statement of defence can be read together with the plaint for the purpose of showing grounds of exemption from limitation under Order 7 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. Whether the trial judge erred in striking out the torts of assault and unlawful arrest as time-barred without considering the ground of exemption pleaded in the reply.

Orders

• Appeal allowed with costs.
• Order of the High Court striking out the torts of assault and unlawful arrest set aside.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Civil Procedure and Limitation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1969 s.4
• Civil Procedure and Limitation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1969 s.8(2)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 rule 7
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 rule 8
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 rule 6
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 rule 11(d)

Cases cited (7)

• Hall V. Eve, All E.R. (1874-1880)
• Iga V wakerere University (1972) E.A. 65; Iga v. Makerere University (1971) I.U.L.R. 121
• African Overseas Trading Co. V Transukh S. Acharya 1963 E.A 468
• G.P.Jani Properties Ltd. (In Voluntary Liquidation) V Dar es Salaam City Council 1966 E.A.281
• Bruce v Odhams Press Ltd (1936) 1 ALL ER 287
• Mrs .M.A. Ochola v.J.H.Wasswa & Another, HCCS no. 981/78
• Sayikwo Murome V.Yovan Kuko & Another, HCCS No. 161/85

Cases citing this judgment (28)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Odeke Joseph and Another v Dusabe Mary and Others (Civil Suit No. 400 of 2017; Civil Suit No. 58 of 2019)
• Chimanbhai Ranchodbhai Patel v Mugoya Kyawa Gaster (Civil Suit 373 of 2019)
• Agonzibwa Ndagano v Kampala District Land Board and Another (Civil Suit No. 728 of 2017)
• Kagara and 3 Others v Atamba and 11 Others (Civil Suit 149 of 2022)
• Kizito v Wamala & 2 Others (Civil Appeal 8 of 2019)
• TSMP (U) Limited v Commissioner Land Registration & 2 Others (Civil Suit 14 of 2016)
• Syanywana Kasereka and others v Registrar of Titles and Another (HCT-01-LD-CS 21)
• Syanywana Kasereka and 2 Others v Registrar of Titles and Another (HCT-01-LD-CS 21 of 2013)
• Bazalirwaki and 2 Others v Kiiza and 2 Others (HCT-01-CV-LD 118 of 2020)
• Kabuubi & Another v Kashaya & 3 others (Civil Suit 385 of 2020)
• Rutebe Farmers Cooperative Society Ltd v Muhanguzi & 22 Others (Civil Suit 54 of 2012)
• Pearl Marina Estates Limited v Roko Construction Limited (Miscellaneous Cause 66 of 2023)
• Nyakairu v Nyakairu and Another (Civil Suit No. 72 of 2006)
• Mivule and 2 Others v Ndawula and Another (Miscellaneous Application 1130 of 2021)
• Olango v Too-rom (Civil Appeal No. 39 of 2019)
• Auma v Lakony (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2019)
• Auma v Kidega & Another (Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2007)
• Lagen v Okot Okumu (Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2016)
• Wokorach & Ors v Dr. Okech & 3 Ors (CIVIL SUIT NO. 059 OF 2011)
• Okeny v Obol (MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION No. 063 OF 2012)
• Opwonya v Achora & Anor (Civil Suit No. 039 of 2009)
• Loum & Anor v Obwoma (Civil Suit No. 021 of 2016)
• Odur v Muto (Civil Appeal No. 0079 of 2016)
• Professor Henry Kerali v Bona & Ors (Civil Suit No. 0009 of 2011)
• Agandru v Etoma (Civil Suit No. 0007 of 2011)
• Kampala District Land Board and Another v Venansio Babweyaka and Others [2008] UGSC 3
• Kampala District Land Board and Another v Venansio Babweyaka and Others (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2007)
• Kampala District Land Board and Another v Babweyaka and 3 Others (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2007)

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