Wakilii

Musisi v Kampala City Council (Civil Suit 60 of 1993)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 46 · 1994 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to amend plaint under Order 6 Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Decision
Application allowed; plaintiff granted leave to amend plaint to correct defendant's name

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 the court has discretion under Order 6 Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules to allow amendment of pleadings at any stage to determine the real questions in controversy. The plaintiff was granted leave to amend the plaint to correct the defendant's name from Kampala City Council to City Council of Kampala, as the error was a genuine mistake causing no reasonable doubt as to the intended defendant's identity. The amendment would not change the character of the action or prejudice the defendant. Costs awarded in the cause.

Outcome

Application allowed; plaintiff granted leave to amend plaint to correct defendant's name

Facts

The plaintiff brought a chamber summons under Order 6 Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking leave to amend the plaint. The plaintiff had sued the defendant as 'Kampala City Council' when the correct legal name was 'City Council of Kampala'. The defendant opposed the application, arguing in their written statement of defence that Kampala City Council was non-existent. The defendant also contended that no statutory notice had been served as required by Act 20 of 1965, that the claim was time-barred, and that a proposed claim for loss of earnings had not been included in the original plaint and lacked proper statutory notice.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the plaint to correct the name of the defendant from 'Kampala City Council' to 'City Council of Kampala'.
  2. Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend the plaint to include a claim for loss of earnings.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is granted leave to amend the plaint with costs in the cause.
  • Amendment to be made out within 14 days from delivery of this ruling.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Correction of Party Name
A plaintiff may amend pleadings to correct the name of a party even if the effect is to substitute a new party, provided the wrong name was given through a genuine mistake which was not misleading and did not cause reasonable doubt as to the identity of the intended party.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Court's Discretion
Under Order 6 Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court may at any stage of proceedings allow either party to alter or amend pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as necessary for determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Prejudice and Costs
An amendment that does not substantially change the action into one of a different character and does not prejudice the rights of the defendant may be allowed, with any prejudice capable of being cured by an award of costs.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (5)

  • Weldon v Heal (1887) 19 QBD 124
  • Hall V. 2 QBD.455
  • Raleigh vs Gosahan 1891 BAC 81 ch 73-81
  • Weldon v Neal (1887) 9 QBD 394
  • Cooper v Smith (1884) 26 Ch D 700

Cases citing this judgment (1)

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.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Musisi v Kampala City Council (Civil Suit 60 of 1993) [1994] UGHC 46 (18 November 1994)
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.