Wakilii

Ples Quality Printers Ltd V Uganda Commercial Bank (Civil Suit No. 680 of 1991)

High Court · [1995] UGHC 4 · 1995 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for adjournment of hearing in a civil suit
Decision
Application for adjournment refused; hearing to proceed

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 dismissed an application for adjournment sought on grounds of counsel's illness and inadequate preparation time. The court found the medical evidence unconvincing and held that counsel from the same firm had adequate time to prepare. The court rejected counsel's threat to walk out as an attempt to intimidate the court and ordered the hearing to proceed.

Outcome

Application for adjournment refused; hearing to proceed

Facts

The hearing of Civil Suit No. 680 of 1991 commenced on 20 April 1995. During the evidence of the plaintiff's first witness, Prof. Sempebwa, who was conducting the case for the plaintiff, sought adjournment on personal grounds and to locate a document. The case was adjourned to 29-30 May 1995 by consent. On 29 May 1995, Prof. Sempebwa did not appear. Mr. Serwanga from the same law firm appeared and sought adjournment citing Prof. Sempebwa's stomach illness. The court granted adjournment on condition that Serwanga study the file and take over prosecution on 30 May 1995. On 30 May 1995, Serwanga again applied for adjournment citing Prof. Sempebwa's continued illness (supported by affidavit and medical note dated 29 May 1995) and inadequate preparation time. Serwanga threatened to walk out if adjournment was not granted. The defendants opposed the application.

Issues

  1. Whether sufficient cause was shown to justify the grant of an adjournment.

Orders

  • Application for adjournment dismissed.
  • Hearing ordered to proceed.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Adjournment — Discretion of Court — Sufficient Cause
Under Order 15 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has discretion to grant an adjournment, and such discretion is exercised in favour of the applicant only where sufficient cause has been shown.
Civil Procedure — Adjournment — Counsel's Illness — Credibility of Medical Evidence
Where medical evidence of counsel's illness is presented only after court has ordered another counsel from the same firm to take over, and where the allegedly sick counsel failed to notify colleagues earlier despite knowing the hearing date, the court may reject such evidence as a ploy to delay proceedings.
Civil Procedure — Adjournment — Inadequate Preparation Time — Same Law Firm
Where a case has been adjourned on condition that counsel from the same firm as the absent counsel study the file and take over prosecution, and where counsel had a full day to prepare with access to the client, lack of preparation time is not sufficient cause to justify a further adjournment.
Civil Procedure — Conduct of Advocates — Threats to Court
It is unbecoming of an advocate to threaten to walk out of court if an adjournment is not granted. Such conduct is intended to intimidate the court and constitutes a disciplinary matter to be brought to the attention of the Law Council. Courts do not operate under such threats.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.15 R.1

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ples Quality Printers Ltd V Uganda Commercial Bank (Civil Suit No. 680 of 1991) [1995] UGHC 4 (30 January 1995)
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.