Wakilii

Nangobi Coneria Kitaka and Another v Stanbic Bank Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 485 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 71 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for verification of names arising from letters of administration
Decision
Application granted with declaration that the two names refer to the same deceased person

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 held that Kitaka Faustine and Kitaka Faustine Kajanazo refer to one and the same person. Applying the reasonable reader test from Sabric International Limited v Attorney General and Davies v Elsby Brothers Limited, the court found that the variation in names constituted a classic misnomer. The deceased used both names interchangeably throughout his life on official documents including bank accounts, academic records, and identity documents. A reasonable person receiving these documents would conclude they refer to the same individual despite the naming variation.

Outcome

Application granted with declaration that the two names refer to the same deceased person

Facts

The late Kitaka Faustine died intestate on 10 March 2012. Letters of Administration were granted to his widow Nangobi Coneria Kitaka and son Galikuwa Moses Kimeze on 10 October 2024. During his lifetime, the deceased was known by two names: Kitaka Faustine (appearing on his death certificate and National ID) and Kitaka Faustine Kajanazo (appearing on his bank account at Stanbic Bank Kamuli Branch, Pensioners' Identity Card, and academic documents). The applicants sought a declaration that both names refer to the same person to enable administration of the estate and settlement of bank accounts. The respondent bank did not oppose the application.

Issues

  1. Whether Kitaka Faustine and Kitaka Faustine Kajanazo refer to one and the same person.
  2. Whether the deceased's names as appearing on the Letters of Administration and those on the Bank Account and National Identity Card relate to the same person.

Orders

  • Kitaka Faustine and Kitaka Faustine Kajanazo refer to one and the same person, now deceased.
  • The deceased's names as appearing on the Letters of Administration and those on the Bank Account and National Identity Card relate to the same person.
  • The costs of this application shall be borne by the estate.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Misnomer — Test for Determining Misnomer
The test for determining whether a variation in names constitutes a misnomer is the reasonable reader test: how would a reasonable person receiving the document take it? If, looking at the document as a whole and in all the circumstances, a reasonable person would say 'Of course it must mean me, but they have got my name wrong,' then there is a case of mere misnomer.
Civil Procedure — Misnomer — Requirements for Doctrine to Apply
For the doctrine of misnomer to apply, two requirements must be satisfied: (1) the author intended to name the subject to whom the name is now being attributed; and (2) a reasonable person would attribute the name to the person to whom it is now intended to be attributed. Misnomer arises when the author merely misnames the correct person as opposed to not being able to identify the correct person.
Evidence — Burden of Proof — Unchallenged Affidavit Evidence
Where facts are deposed in an affidavit and remain unchallenged or denied by the respondent, they are presumed to be true.
Succession & Estates — Administration of Estates — Verification of Names of Deceased
Where a deceased person used different names interchangeably during their lifetime on official documents, and the variation constitutes a misnomer under the reasonable reader test, the court may grant a declaration that the different names refer to the same person to enable proper administration of the estate.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (5)

  • Samwiri Massa v Rose Achen [1978] HCB 297
  • Makerere University v St Mark Education Institute Ltd and Others (1994) KALR 26
  • Kaggwa Micheal v Olal Mark and 6 Others (Civil Appeal No. 010 of 2017)
  • Sabric International Limited v Attorney General (SCCA No. 30 of 2020)
  • Davies v Elsby Brothers Limited [1960] 3 All ER

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nangobi Coneria Kitaka and Another v Stanbic Bank Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 485 of 2025) [2026] UGHC 71 (9 February 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.