Flynote

Leave to amend affidavits; Exception to general rule; Amendment allowed where no evidential averment affected; Amendment allowed in exceptional cases.

Case Summary

The High Court of Uganda at Luwero granted an application to amend an affidavit in support of a motion to strike out a plaint. The applicant sought to replace the phrase “my application” with “instant application” in paragraph 11, which the court found was not an evidential averment but a formal or introductory part of the affidavit. Relying on East African precedent, the court held that amendments to non-evidential portions of an affidavit are permissible to correct drafting errors that do not affect the substance of the case. The amendment was allowed to prevent technicalities from obstructing substantive justice and to ensure the fair determination of the dispute.

“Upon consideration of the impugned paragraph, it is manifest that the same does not contain any averment of fact and, as such, cannot be treated as evidence before this Court. Rather, its proper characterization lies either as a statement of truth or as a continuation of the introductory part of the affidavit, depending on the drafting style employed by learned counsel who prepared it. What is beyond dispute is that it does not amount to an evidential averment. For that reason, the paragraph squarely falls within the recognized exception which allows for the amendment of affidavits…..” Per Hon. Justice Faridah Shamilah Bukirwa Ntambi.