Print and Stationery Suppliers v Kitgum District Administration (Civil Suit 926 of 1994)
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The court held that despite the fact that the Local Administration Act 1967 had been repealed before the suit was filed, the continued use of the former name 'Kitgum District Administration' by both parties in correspondence constituted a bona fide mistake. The court ruled that the proper defendant should have been the District Resistance Council, but that substitution or amendment was permissible under Order 6 r.18 of the Civil Procedure Rules to determine the real matter in dispute. The preliminary objection was overruled with costs to the plaintiff.
Outcome
Preliminary objection dismissed; matter to proceed to trial on merits.
Facts
The plaintiff filed a civil suit against Kitgum District Administration claiming special and general damages for breach of contract. The defendant raised a preliminary objection on two grounds: first, that the suit was misconceived because Kitgum District Administration had ceased to exist under the Local Government Resistance Councils Statute 1993 (Statute No. 15 of 1993), which came into force on 31 December 1993 and repealed the Local Administration Act 1967; second, that statutory notice required under Act 20 of 1969 had not been properly served. The plaint was filed on 21 December 1994, approximately one year after the statutory repeal. Evidence showed that both parties had continued to use the former name 'Kitgum District Administration' in correspondence even after the statutory change.
Issues
- Whether the suit was misconceived because it was brought against Kitgum District Administration, a non-existent legal entity following repeal of the Local Administration Act 1967 by the Local Government Resistance Councils Statute 1993.
- Whether statutory notice was properly served on the defendant as required under Act 20 of 1969.
- Whether the court could allow amendment to substitute the proper defendant name under Order 6 r.18 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Orders
- Preliminary objection overruled.
- Costs awarded to the plaintiff.
- Leave to appeal granted.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Local Administration Act 1967 (Act 18 of 1967) s.1
- Local Government Resistance Councils Statute 1993 (Statute No. 15 of 1993) s.48
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 1
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 r.18
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 r.27
- Civil Procedure Act s.101
- Act 20 of 1969
- Act 29 of 1969
Cases cited (2)
- Ssajjabi v Manufacture (1974) HCB 202
- Kasule v Kasuja (1979) HCB 99
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.