Wakilii

Richard Okwir v George William Mpungu (Civil Suit 132 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 765 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to admit witness statement filed out of time in civil suit
Decision
Witness statement admitted on record; defendant granted liberty to adduce further evidence with leave

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 admitted a witness statement filed out of time without leave, holding that procedural rules exist to achieve justice, not to oust it. Where evidence is filed belatedly but does not cause incurable prejudice and the opposite party can test it by cross-examination, the evidence should be admitted to ensure determination on the merits. The defendant retained the opportunity to cross-examine the witness and adduce further evidence with leave.

Outcome

Witness statement admitted on record; defendant granted liberty to adduce further evidence with leave

Facts

On 26 March 2025, the court directed both parties to file trial bundles and witness statements by 15 April 2025. The defendant complied with the directions. On 5 May 2025, the plaintiff filed an additional witness statement by Ntabaazi Eflaim without leave of court, outside the timeframe set by the court. During the hearing on 16 May 2025, plaintiff's counsel sought to have the witness statement admitted on record, arguing it was pertinent to the case and caused no prejudice. Defendant's counsel objected, submitting that the late filing was tactical, made after reviewing the defendant's evidence, and contravened court directions. The hearing of the substantive matter had not yet commenced.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should admit a witness statement filed outside the timeframe set by court directions and without leave of court.

Orders

  • Prayer of the Plaintiff granted.
  • The witness statement of Ntabaazi Eflaim filed on 5 May 2025 shall be treated as having been properly filed and is on the record of the Court.
  • The Defendant shall have liberty to adduce further evidence with leave of court should he feel there is need to do so.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Witness Statements — Late Filing — Discretion to Admit
Where a witness statement is filed outside the timeframe directed by the court but the hearing has not commenced, the opposite party will have the opportunity to cross-examine the witness and prepare rebuttal evidence, and the court may admit the statement in the interests of substantive justice, particularly where no incurable prejudice results.
Civil Procedure — Procedural Rules — Purpose — Substantive Justice
Procedural rules exist to help achieve the cause of justice, not to oust it. Where evidence is filed belatedly but does not lead to incurable prejudice and the opposite party is able to test it by cross-examination, the evidence should be admitted to ensure that the matter is determined on its merits.
Evidence — Admissibility — Witness Statements — Late Filing Without Leave
Under Order 18 rule 5A of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has authority to accept a witness statement filed out of time if good cause is shown and the other party is not prejudiced. The provision balances procedural discipline with the broader goal of achieving substantive justice.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Seruwagi Mohamed v Yuasa Investment Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 334 of 2013)

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Richard Okwir v George William Mpungu (Civil Suit 132 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 765 (12 August 2025)
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.