Uganda Case Law

Rugasara and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda (Application No.22 of 2020; Application No.5 of 2020)

Rugasara and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda (Application No.22 of 2020; Application No.5 of 2020) [2020] EACJ 13 (26 November 2020) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Application No.22 of 2020 ; Application No.5 of 2020

Judge

Mugenyi PJ, Nyachae J, Nyawello J

The East African Court of Justice refused a full-bench hearing, but ordered Rwanda to file certified copies of the relevant judgment and pleadings, while leaving translations to the Applicants.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Production Of Documents
• Judicial Economy
• Court Composition
• Access To Justice
• Judicial-economy

Kirti Sigh Rana v Mayanja & Ors (MISC. APPEAL No. 203 of 2015)

Kirti Sigh Rana v Mayanja & Ors (MISC. APPEAL No. 203 of 2015) [2017] UGHCCD 210 (21 September 2017)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

MISC. APPEAL No. 203 of 2015

Judge

Elubu, J

The High Court allowed an appeal against the Registrar's dismissal and ordered Post Bank Jinja Branch to produce a letter dated 21/8/2008 as evidence.

• Production Of Documents
• Evidence Admissibility
• Appeals
• Court Orders
• Production-of-documents
• Evidence-admissibility

Said Tibazarwa v Uganda Commercial Bank

Said Tibazarwa v Uganda Commercial Bank (Civil Suit No. 13 of 1996) [2001] UGCommC 2 (1 March 2001)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit No. 13 of 1996

The High Court struck out a bank’s defence for failing to produce account documents and entered judgment for the customer for a liquidated sum, interest, and costs.

• Bank Customer Relationship
• Production Of Documents
• Striking Out Defence
• Liquidated Damages
• Civil-procedure
• Striking-out-defence

Patel v Singh and Co.

Patel v Singh and Co. (Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1955) [1950] EACA 378 (1 January 1950)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1955

Judge

Bacon, JA, Briggs (Acting Vice-President), Sinclair, AP

The court held it had no jurisdiction to order an arbitrator, after filing an award, to supply or file arbitration proceedings on an ad hoc application.

• Arbitration Award
• Functus Officio
• Court Jurisdiction
• Production Of Documents
• Arbitration
• Functus-officio

Rex v Cronk (Cr. R. 64/1931.)

Rex v Cronk (Cr. R. 64/1931.) [1931] EACA 32 (1 January 1931)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Cr. R. 64/1931.

Judge

Barth CJ

The court held that the statutory phrase 'tax last payable' as used in section 13 of the Non-native Poll Tax Ordinance must be interpreted to mean the tax for the current year. This interpretation is necessary because, if the phrase referred only to the preceding year's tax, there would be no authority to require production of the receipt for the tax currently due. Since the accused was asked to produce his 1930 receipt in 1931, and the law only empowered the collector to require production of the current year's receipt, the conviction was not sustainable. The court agreed with the Resident M…

Source excerpt

• Poll Tax Offences
• Statutory Interpretation
• Production Of Documents

Tyson Bros Ltd v Newsome (C.C. 130/1928.)

Tyson Bros Ltd v Newsome (C.C. 130/1928.) [1928] EACA 18 (1 January 1928)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

C.C. 130/1928.

Judge

Barth CJ

The court held that a liquidated claim need not be probed beyond the face of the plaint, and entered judgment for the plaintiff after the defendant failed to appear.

• Production Of Documents
• Liquidated Claims
• Default Judgment
• Civil-procedure
• Default-judgment
• Liquidated-claims

Tyson Bros. Ltd v Newsome

Tyson Bros. Ltd v Newsome (Civil Case No. 130 of 1928) [1928] EACA 7 (1 January 1928)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Case No. 130 of 1928

Judge

Barth CJ

Court held that a liquidated claim on the face of the plaint did not require further document production before judgment where the defendant failed to appear.

• Production Of Documents
• Liquidated Claims
• Default Judgment
• Production-of-documents
• Liquidated-claims
• Default-judgment

Tibahwerayo v Namuli (Misc. Application No. 433 of 2018)

Tibahwerayo v Namuli (Misc. Application No. 433 of 2018) [2019] UGHCFD 1 (26 August 2019)

Court

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc. Application No. 433 of 2018

Judge

Kitariisibwa-Katunguka, J

The court held that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for adducing additional evidence on appeal. The evidence sought to be introduced was within the applicant's knowledge at the time of the original proceedings, and he had the opportunity to seek a production order or adduce such evidence but failed to do so. The court emphasized that litigation must come to an end and that parties are expected to present all relevant evidence at trial. The exceptions for admitting additional evidence on appeal—such as discovery of new and important matters not available with due diligence—were not…

Source excerpt

• Adducing Additional Evidence
• Matrimonial Property
• Production Of Documents
• Appeals Procedure