Tibesigwa n v Bwebare (HCT-01-LD-MA-0018-2025)
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 granted conditional leave to amend a memorandum of appeal, finding that while the applicant's substantive grounds for amendment were valid, the proposed amended grounds violated procedural requirements by being argumentative and narrative rather than concise. The court held that amendments should be allowed to ensure all real questions in controversy are determined, but must comply with Order 43 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The applicant was ordered to file a properly formatted amended memorandum within 14 days and to bear the costs of the application.
Outcome
Application granted conditionally with costs to the respondent; applicant to file compliant amended memorandum within 14 days
Facts
The applicant was a plaintiff in a land suit before the Chief Magistrate's Court of Kamwenge, which was dismissed on 22 March 2024. He filed a civil appeal on 18 April 2024 with four grounds of appeal. Upon receiving the record of proceedings on 15 May 2024, he discovered that the trial court had not considered local council court proceedings. In February 2025, he filed this application seeking leave to amend his memorandum of appeal to include an additional ground addressing this omission. The respondent opposed, citing delay (from May 2024 to February 2025), alleged bad faith, and procedural deficiencies in the proposed amended memorandum. The applicant explained the delay as resulting from misplaced court documents and subsequent advice to refile.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to amend the Memorandum of Appeal in Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2024.
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- The Applicant, Tibesigwa Nkurunungi John, is hereby granted leave to amend the Memorandum of Appeal in Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2024.
- The Applicant shall file a fresh, properly formatted, and fully compliant Amended Memorandum of Appeal within 14 days from the date of delivery of this Ruling.
- Costs of this Application shall be borne by the Applicant and paid to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
Cases cited (10)
- Cropper v Smith (1883) 26 Ch D 700
- Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Martin Adala Obone (SCCCA No. 4 of 1994)
- Pascal Rwakahanda v Uganda Posts & Telecommunications Corporation (M.A No. 484 of 2014)
- Plessey (Pty) Limited v Mutoni Construction Ltd (M.A No. 178 of 2011)
- Banya Tonny v Opio Charles (Civil Appeal No. 0036 of 2018)
- Celtel Uganda T/A Zain Uganda v Karungi Suzan (Civil Appeal No. 0073 of 2013)
- Tickten Francis & Chelimo Nelson Kaprokuto v The Electoral Commission & 2 Ors (HC T-04-CV-EP-0001 of 2012)
- Makula International Ltd v Cardinal Nsubuga (1992) HCB 11
- Eastern Bakery v Colonial Produce Ltd [1959] EA 18
- Mabale Growers Tea Factory Limited v Bamyamooti (Civil Appeal 37 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 844
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.