[2007] UGCommC 99

[2007] UGCommC 99

The court found that the respondent had raised a serious and arguable point of law regarding whether a counsel, whose information forms the basis of an affidavit, is a potential witness and should be disqualified from representing a party. The judge noted that this issue is appropriate for guidance by an appellate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] UGCommC 99
Parties
Applicant: Dynasity Africa Limited; Respondent: Moses Mugabi and Others
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 409 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
leave to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Disqualification of Counsel, Affidavit Evidence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Disqualification of Counsel Affidavit Evidence

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dynasity Africa Limited

Applicant

Moses Mugabi and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the ruling dismissing the application to disqualify counsel for the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether a counsel whose information forms the basis of an affidavit is a potential witness and should be disqualified from representing a party.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent had raised a serious and arguable point of law regarding whether a counsel, whose information forms the basis of an affidavit, is a potential witness and should be disqualified from representing a party. The judge noted that this issue is appropriate for guidance by an appellate court, as it is not uncommon for affidavits to be based on information from counsel. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal, as the matter merited consideration by a higher court and there was no evidence of dilatory conduct by the applicant.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal granted

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the respondent to appeal against the ruling delivered on 12th November 2007.
  • The order as to costs in the intended appeal shall bind the costs of this application.