Wakilii

Olanya & Another v Ladur & Another (Miscellaneous Application 134 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 1195 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to adduce additional evidence in civil appeal arising from Chief Magistrate Court judgment
Decision
Application to adduce additional evidence dismissed with costs to the respondents

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 dismissed an application to adduce a certificate of title as additional evidence on appeal, holding that the evidence was within the applicants' knowledge during trial but deliberately concealed, could not influence the determination of the appeal which concerned customary land disputes, and introduced a new cause of action inappropriate for appellate proceedings.

Outcome

Application to adduce additional evidence dismissed with costs to the respondents

Facts

The respondents sued the applicants in the Chief Magistrate Court claiming ownership of unregistered customary land allegedly gifted to their predecessor Andrea Mwodo by Agonyo in 1889. The trial court found in favour of the respondents, declaring them owners and awarding damages and an eviction order. The applicants appealed. During the appeal process but after the trial court judgment, the applicants obtained a freehold certificate of title over the suit land through an application made in December 2019. The applicants then sought to adduce this certificate as additional evidence on appeal, claiming it was not availed by their counsel at trial and that the trial magistrate lost jurisdiction once the title was issued.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellants should be permitted to adduce additional evidence (a certificate of title) on appeal.
  2. Whether the three conditions for admission of fresh evidence on appeal were satisfied.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Additional Evidence — Conditions for Admission
An appellate court may admit additional evidence only in exceptional circumstances: the evidence must not have been obtainable with reasonable diligence at trial; it must be relevant and credible; it must be capable of probably having an important influence on the result; and the application must be brought without undue delay.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Additional Evidence — Deliberate Concealment
Where a party was aware of evidence during trial but deliberately chose not to adduce it, that party cannot later seek to introduce the evidence on appeal on the ground that their counsel failed to avail it, as it is not the role of counsel to adduce evidence.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Additional Evidence — New Cause of Action
Where the dispute before the trial court concerned unregistered customary land and the proposed additional evidence is a certificate of title that introduces a completely different cause of action, the evidence cannot have any influence on the determination of the grounds of appeal and should not be admitted.
Evidence — Fresh Evidence — Finality of Litigation
Parties bear an obligation to adduce all material evidence before the trial court, and a party cannot require a second hearing to put matters right simply because potentially persuasive evidence was not put before the court, as permitting this would undermine the system of justice and respect for finality.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (5)

  • Karmali Tarmohamed and Another v I.H. Lakhani and Co. [1958] EA 567
  • Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489
  • Michael Mabikke v Law Development Centre (Supreme Court Miscellaneous Application No. 16 of 2015)
  • Nanyonjo Aisha v Kato Edward Ssalongo (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 542 of 2022)
  • Aluma Michael Bayo and Others v Said Nasur Okuti (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 0012 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Olanya & Another v Ladur & Another (Miscellaneous Application 134 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 1195 (20 February 2024)
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.