Ojangole & Anor v Jerome Otim (Misc. Applic. 41 of 2013)
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
Held that an affidavit thumb printed by a person who understood its contents raises a presumption of illiteracy, requiring compliance with sections 2 and 3 of the Illiterates Protection Act. Non-compliance renders the affidavit defective. The court allowed additional evidence to be adduced where graves were not visible at trial due to flooding.
Outcome
Applicants granted leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal
Facts
The applicants sought to adduce additional evidence in a civil appeal arising from a land claim. The evidence concerned graves of the second applicant's relatives which could not be seen at trial because floods had covered them. The respondent opposed the application and filed an affidavit in reply sworn by Levi Otim, which was thumb printed and sworn in Lira before an advocate based in Soroti. The applicants challenged the affidavit as defective for non-compliance with the Illiterates Protection Act.
Issues
- Whether the applicants should be allowed to adduce additional evidence on appeal.
- Whether the affidavit in reply sworn by a thumb print is defective where the deponent did not comply with the Illiterates Protection Act.
Orders
- Application to adduce additional evidence allowed.
- Costs in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.