[2017] UGCA 39

[2017] UGCA 39

The Court found that the evidence the applicant sought to adduce—a letter from the Assistant Registrar suggesting the respondents' Letters of Administration were likely forged—did not constitute a 'new and important matter' as it could have been obtained with due diligence before or during trial. The information was available on public record, and the applicant failed to demonstrate that it was not accessible at the material time. The Court also found the evidence not relevant to the grounds of appeal, as the issue of forgery had already been canvassed and decided at trial. The letter was deemed speculative and lacking in evidential value, merely expressing an opinion without expertise on...

Citation
[2017] UGCA 39
Parties
Applicant: Nsabwa Ham; Respondent: Apollo Wasswa Basudde; Respondent: Isaiah Kalanzi; Respondent: Rosemary Wanyana
Court
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
13 October 2017
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application No. 130 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Adducing Additional Evidence on Appeal, Letters of Administration, Forgery of Court Documents, Diligence in Evidence Discovery
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Family and Children Adducing Additional Evidence on Appeal Letters of Administration Forgery of Court Documents Diligence in Evidence Discovery

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nsabwa Ham

Applicant

Apollo Wasswa Basudde

Respondent

Isaiah Kalanzi

Respondent

Rosemary Wanyana

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has met the legal threshold for adducing additional evidence on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence sought to be adduced is new, relevant, credible, and likely to influence the outcome of the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the application to adduce additional evidence was brought without undue delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the evidence the applicant sought to adduce—a letter from the Assistant Registrar suggesting the respondents' Letters of Administration were likely forged—did not constitute a 'new and important matter' as it could have been obtained with due diligence before or during trial. The information was available on public record, and the applicant failed to demonstrate that it was not accessible at the material time. The Court also found the evidence not relevant to the grounds of appeal, as the issue of forgery had already been canvassed and decided at trial. The letter was deemed speculative and lacking in evidential value, merely expressing an opinion without expertise on...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant shall pay the costs of this application.