Wakilii

Nagayi Florence v Ndoraaho Amooti Yovan Ruhukya and Others (Miscellaneous Application 224 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 174 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to amend written statement of defence to include a counterclaim, arising from Civil Suit No. HCT-17-LD-CS-0341-2023
Decision
Leave granted to amend written statement of defence to include counterclaim

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 High Court granted the applicant leave to amend her written statement of defence to include a counterclaim. The court held that amendments to pleadings should be freely allowed before hearing if they can be made without injustice to the other side, and that the amendment was necessary to determine all questions in controversy between the parties. The application satisfied the principles in Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Obene: the amendment would not cause injustice, would avoid multiplicity of proceedings, was not made mala fide, and was not prohibited by law.

Outcome

Leave granted to amend written statement of defence to include counterclaim

Facts

The applicant is the registered proprietor of land comprised in Bulemezi Block 173 plots 47 and 48, which she received through a will from her late husband Lt Col Tumwebaze who died in a 1998 plane crash. The first respondent filed Civil Suit No. 0341 of 2023 against the applicant and nine others seeking a declaration that he rightfully purchased eight acres of the suit land, vacant possession, and vacation of caveats. The applicant initially filed a written statement of defence herself without legal representation. She later instructed M/S Katarikawe & Co. Advocates who advised that the defence did not fully serve her interests and had omitted material facts fundamental to her case. The time within which to file a counterclaim had expired. The applicant therefore sought leave of court to amend her written statement of defence to include a counterclaim. The respondents were served with the application but did not participate in the proceedings.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend her written statement of defence to include a counterclaim.
  2. What remedies are available to the applicant.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • The applicant shall amend her written statement of defence and add a counterclaim which shall be filed in court and served upon the respondents/counter defendants within 15 days from the date of filing.
  • The respondents/counter defendants shall file their replies to the written statement of defence and counterclaim within 15 days from the date of service of the written statement of defence and counterclaim.
  • Costs shall be in the main cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Principles Governing Grant of Leave
Amendments to pleadings sought before the hearing should be freely allowed if they can be made without injustice to the other side, and there is no injustice if the other side can be compensated by costs.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Court's Discretion Under Order 6 Rule 19
The court may at any stage of the 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 may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.
Civil Procedure — Counterclaim — Leave to File Out of Time
Where a defendant has not filed a counterclaim within the prescribed time under Order 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, it is incumbent upon the defendant to apply to court for leave to file the counterclaim out of time, and the court is endowed with discretion to allow such application as long as it is not brought mala fide with intention to deflect the course of justice.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Gaso Principles
An amendment should be allowed where: (a) it does not cause injustice to the other party; (b) it avoids multiplicity of proceedings; (c) the application is not made mala fide; and (d) the amendment is not expressly or impliedly prohibited by any law.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (13)

  • Eastern Bakery v Castelino (1958) EA 467
  • Tildesley v Harper (1878) 10 Ch D 393
  • Clarapede v Commercial Union Association (1883) 32 WR 262
  • Budding v Murdoch (1875) 7 Ch D 42
  • Ma Shwe Mya v Maung Po Hnaung (1921) 48 IA 274
  • Raleigh vs Goschen (1898) 73,87
  • Weldon v Neal (1887) 19 QBD 394
  • Hilton v Sutton Steam Laundry (1946) KB 65
  • Assa Abloy (U) Ltd v John Mboizi (Miscellaneous Application No. 784 of 2021)
  • Sarah Nyakato v Lin Jeng Liang and 5 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 316 of 2022)
  • Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
  • Kaahwa Francis v Commissioner Land Registration (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 33 of 2012)
  • Life Line Ministries v Akello Frida and 12 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 003 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nagayi Florence v Ndoraaho Amooti Yovan Ruhukya and Others (Miscellaneous Application 224 of 2025) [2026] UGHC 174 (2 March 2026)
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.