Ad Code

Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

The Director, Jinnah’s Company, Ltd. V. Francis Owino, Civ. App. 22-D-67, 22/11/67, Hamlyn J.



The Director, Jinnah’s Company, Ltd. V. Francis Owino, Civ. App. 22-D-67, 22/11/67, Hamlyn J.

Respondent brought this action against appellant company for certain claims allegedly due him. Appellant, in his pled dings relied on an agreement between the parties for the payment of Shs. 2,500/- in full settlement of the claim. Respondent Does not deny his signature on the agreement, but he raised the defence of non est factum in that he could not read English, in which language the contract was written, and that he would not have signed it had he known its contents. The trial court did not say anything about the burden of proof in a situation such as this one.

            Held: (1) Once respondent has admitted his signing of the agreement, it is incumbent on him “to show that executed the deed under a substantial mistake as to its contents and that such mistake was induced by the machinations of some other person. If he can show this, then he can effectively plead that the deed is not his deed, but the onus is on him” (2) Reviewing the evidence in this light, the High Court allowed the appeal. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments