Uganda Corporation Creameries and Another v Reamaton Limited (Civil Application No. 44 98)
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 considered a preliminary objection alleging that certain paragraphs of the deponent's affidavits offended O.17 r.3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules by failing to disclose the source of information relating to service of a letter. Reading the affidavits as a whole rather than in isolation, the single judge held that the deponent had expressed her grounds of belief rather than the source of her information. The paragraphs complained of therefore did not contravene O.17 r.3(1). The preliminary objection was overruled.
Outcome
Preliminary objection overruled; main application to proceed
Facts
In an application relating to extension of time to file an appeal, the applicants relied on affidavits sworn by Blaise Namwezi in support of a Notice of Motion. The respondent raised a preliminary objection concerning paragraphs 4, 12 and 14/15 of the main and supplementary affidavits. The respondent contended that those paragraphs related to the service of a copy of a letter requesting the record of proceedings; that the deponent failed to serve that letter and to retain proof of service; and that she should have disclosed the source of her information since she was neither a process server nor a court clerk who might have effected service. The applicants' counsel argued the objection was misconceived and premature, and that the affidavits merely stated the deponent's grounds of belief and provided background facts relevant to showing sufficient cause for extension of time.
Issues
- Whether the paragraphs of the deponent's affidavits failed to disclose the source of information contrary to O.17 r.3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Whether the preliminary objection to the affidavits was premature.
Orders
- The preliminary objection is overruled.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.17 r.3(1)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.