Wakilii

Namusisi and Others v Ntabazi (Civil Suit No. 887 of 1988 - RULING -1)

High Court · [1997] UGHC 21 · 1997 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Evidentiary ruling in first instance civil suit regarding admissibility of documentary evidence
Decision
Application to tender document in evidence dismissed

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 court declined to admit an undated document variously described as a Sale Agreement, Tenancy Agreement, and loan repayment agreement. The court held that when a transaction has been reduced to writing, the writing becomes the exclusive memorial thereof and no extrinsic evidence is admissible to prove the transaction independently or contradict the terms. The document was also irrelevant as it related to land in Kyadondo Block 11 Kabowa while the suit concerned land in Kibuga Block 16 plots 654, 655 and 692 at Ndeeba.

Outcome

Application to tender document in evidence dismissed

Facts

During examination-in-chief of Mr. Henry Kala (DW3), an advocate with M/S Kala and Co. Advocates, Counsel for the defendant applied to tender an undated Agreement relating to land comprised in Kyadondo Block 11 Kabowa. The document was variously described as a Sale Agreement between the Administrators of the Estate of the late Sulaiti Jagwe as vendors and Samuel Ntege as purchaser, though titled as a Tenancy Agreement. DW3 gave oral evidence suggesting the document related to loan repayment rather than a sale. The suit before the court concerned lands comprised in Kibuga Block 16 plots 654, 655 and 692 at Ndeeba. The document had been produced by the plaintiffs' client and accepted for identification without objection. Counsel for the plaintiffs objected to its admissibility.

Issues

  1. Whether oral evidence can contradict or vary the title of a document or its written contents.
  2. Whether an undated Sale Agreement relating to land in Kyadondo Block 11 Kabowa is relevant to a suit concerning lands in Kibuga Block 16 plots 654, 655 and 692 at Ndeeba.
  3. Whether Counsel for the plaintiffs is estopped from objecting to the admissibility of the Sale Agreement where it was produced by their client and accepted for identification.

Orders

  • Objection to admissibility of the document sustained.
  • Document declined admission in evidence.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Documentary Evidence — Parol Evidence Rule — Exclusion of Extrinsic Evidence
When a transaction has been reduced into writing, either by requirement of law or by the parties, the writing becomes the exclusive memorial thereof and no extrinsic evidence is admissible either to prove independently the transaction or to contradict the terms.
Evidence — Relevancy — Document Relating to Different Property
A document relating to land in one block and plot is irrelevant to a suit concerning land in a different block and plots, and there is no relevancy between such a document and the lands which are the subject matter of the suit.
Evidence — Admissibility — Production for Identification Does Not Render Document Admissible
Production of a document by a party and acceptance for identification, without objection by opposing counsel at that time, does not per se render an irrelevant document admissible, particularly where the nature and character of the document is uncertain.

Legislation cited (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Namusisi and Others v Ntabazi (Civil Suit No. 887 of 1988 - RULING -1) [1997] UGHC 21 (5 February 1997)
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.