Nantumbwe and Another v Namazzi and 10 Others (Civil Miscellaneous Application 119 of 2023)

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.

Holding

The High Court granted the application for review, holding that the omission of an eviction order from the typed judgment—when that order had been pronounced in open court—constituted an error apparent on the face of the record and sufficient reason for review. The court ordered that the eviction order against the third respondent be added to the judgment and that corrected copies replace those previously issued.

Outcome

Application granted; judgment rectified to include eviction order as pronounced in open court; corrected copies of judgment to be issued

Facts

The applicants filed Civil Suit No. 46 of 2021, which was determined in their favour. When judgment was delivered in open court on 19 June 2023 in the presence of both parties and their counsel, the court pronounced an eviction order against the third defendant from 12 acres comprising the estate of Eneriko Male. However, the typed copies of the judgment signed and issued to the parties omitted this eviction order. The applicants then brought this application under sections 82 and 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking review of the judgment to include the omitted order and recall of the original judgment copies.

Issues

1. Whether the typed judgment should be reviewed to include an eviction order that was pronounced in open court but omitted during typing.
2. Whether the omission of the eviction order in the typed judgment constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record.
3. Whether the applicants have demonstrated sufficient reason for review of the judgment.

Orders

• Application for review allowed.
• An eviction order against the third respondent off of the 12 acres comprising the estate of the late Eneriko Male aka Asoni Male is added to the judgment in Civil Suit No. 46 of 2021.
• All hard copies of the judgment dated 19 June 2023 issued to the parties are recalled and to be replaced with rectified copies including the reviewed orders.
• Each party to bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Civil Procedure Act s.82
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Judicature Act s.33
• Civil Procedure Rules O.46 r.1
• Civil Procedure Rules O.46 r.2
• Civil Procedure Rules O.46 r.4
• Civil Procedure Rules O.46 r.8

Cases cited (4)

• Outa Levi v Uganda Transport Corporation [1975] HCB 353
• FX Mubuuke v UEB (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 98 of 2005)
• Mohamed Allibhai v WE Bukenya (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 56 of 1996)
• Edison Kanyabwera v Pastori Tamwebaze (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2004)

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