Yako Bank Uganda Limited v Onek Benon David and 8 Others (Civil Suit 1344 of 2024; Miscellaneous Application No. 0725 of 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.

Holding

Held that written authorisation is not required for a company officer to swear an affidavit on behalf of the company where the deponent has personal knowledge of the facts by virtue of their position. Held further that leave to amend pleadings should be freely granted where the amendment does not alter the character of the action, does not prejudice the opposite party, and serves to prevent multiplicity of suits. Application granted.

Outcome

Leave to amend plaint granted; applicant to file amended plaint within 10 days

Facts

The applicant bank disbursed a loan of UGX 174,000,000 to the 7th respondent on 4 November 2021 for 24 months at 20% interest. The loan appeared to have been paid and was closed. The bank later discovered that UGX 64,000,000 had been fraudulently debited from another customer's account (M/s. 5 Point Investment Limited) on 5 June 2023 and transferred to the 7th respondent's account, of which UGX 62,933,708 was used to settle the loan. The bank contended that because the loan was paid with fraudulently obtained funds, the debt of UGX 106,551,054 remained outstanding. The bank sought leave to amend its plaint in the main suit to add a claim for recovery of this outstanding balance against the 7th respondent. The 7th respondent objected, arguing that the affidavit in support was defective for lack of written company authorisation and that the amendment introduced a new cause of action.

Issues

1. Whether the applicant's affidavit in support is defective for lack of written authorisation from the company.
2. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend the plaint in Civil Suit No. 1344 of 2024.

Orders

• Preliminary objection overruled.
• Application granted.
• Applicant to file amended plaint within 10 days from the date of this ruling.
• Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 6 Rule 13
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 6 Rule 19
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 19 Rule 3(1)
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 29 Rule 1
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 3 Rule 1
• Constitution of Uganda Article 126(2)(e)

Cases cited (5)

• Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
• Mulowooza & Brothers Ltd v Shah & Co. Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2010)
• Eastern Bakery Versus Castelino, Sir Kenneth O'Connor (1958) E.A 461
• Akol Hellen Odeke v Okodel Umar (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2021)
• Namutebi v Ssemanda and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 0430 of 2021)

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