evidence law note

1. GULU UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF LAW
EVIDENCE GROUP WORK.
BY. Mrs. ADONG MAXI
GROUP MEMBERS.
1. OGWANG DAVID EMMANUEL 19/U/1219/GBL/PS
2. AYELLA NOBERT MAO 18/U/1821/GBL/PS
3. APIYO EUNICE 19/U/1145/GBL/PS
4. SSEGONGA DOREEN
5. CHEROP MERCY
6. WALERA ADRIAN 19/U/1249/GBL/PS
7. NAMUKOSE CISSY 19/U/1204/GBL/PS
8. NSUBUGA ADRIAN
TOPIC.
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE AND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE.

2. Prima facie evidence
This refers to evidence sufficient to establish a fact or raise a
presumption of fact unless rebutted.
Prima facie is a Latin expression meaning at first sight or based
on first impression. A common translation is on the face of it.
In common law jurisdictions, prima facie evidence was taken to
be sufficient to prove a certain fact or raise a presumption of fact
unless it was rebutted.
In most legal proceedings, there is a requirement for the existence
of a prima facie case to exist after which the legal proceeding can
commence to test it. In such a case, prima facie evidence is
presented before court; of which if it raises a presumption of a
given fact that indeed a certain tort was committed; then a court
trial can proceed to come to a collective conclusion. For instance,
in a rape case, the medical evidence from a professional medical
practioner with a valid license showing that indeed a woman was
raped that is; semen, bruises in the vagina, blood can be used as
prima facie evidence for a rape claim. If this medical evidence is
found to be relevant to the rape claim, then it becomes admissible
and sufficient for a trial of rape to proceed in court.
Burden of proof

3. When it comes to burden of proof, he who alleges must prove. In
various legal proceedings, a party that alleges must prove hence it
has the burden of proof of which this requires prima facie
evidence that proves the facts relevant in a given matter.
Otherwise if it so happens that such evidence presented cannot
prove the essential facts of the case in order to be sufficient to
establish a case then the claim might be subject to dismissal
without even the contribution of the other parties to such a
matter.
In addition, where it surfaces that the defence counsel ushers into
the case on table other evidence in relation to the relevant facts of
the case; this can ignite a full trial on the matter in question. It is
key to note that prima facie evidence is regarded as a foundation
for building a case in some situations.
In common law jurisdictions, the prosecution had a duty to
disclose all the evidence to be used to the defence in a criminal
trial. Such evidence would consist of prima facie evidence as well.
Furthermore, in most cases, prima facie is confused with res Ipsa
loquitur. Well, res Ipsa loquitur means that the thing speaks for
itself. Prima facie denotes that adequate evidence must be
available for a case to be established while res ipsa loquitur
simply denotes that facts are so obvious that a party does not
need to explain anymore. Subsequent are cases explaining the
doctrines of prima facie evidence and res ipsa loquitur;
Case law on prima facie evidence.
In case of rape; the prosecution must present to court substantial
evidence to show that indeed rape occurred, which when
accepted by the opposing party it becomes prima facie evidence;

4. subsequently used to establish the case. By virtue, of section 123
which provides for rape, it is stated that there must be a person
that has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl without
her consent or it would be with her consent but which is obtained
through force, due to fear of bodily harm, false representation of
the nature of act or a married woman by personating her
husband.
The ingredients of rape are exemplified subsequently;
1. Carnal knowledge.
To prove rape, there must have been penetration however
slight by the penis of the vagina. Much as semen may not be
discovered during medical examination as long as
penetration was without consent of a woman or girl; the act
amounts to rape.
In Uganda v Wadri (criminal session 39 of 2014) where the
accused was convicted of rape due to unlawful carnal
knowledge of Andruru Rose without her consent which is
alleged to have happened on 8/06/2013 at Elefea village in
Arua district. In this case; the victim testified that when the
accused was pulled off her, she found her private parts
covered with blood of which she was feeling pain
everywhere. On medical examination; by Dr. Ambayo
Richard of Police Health Centre 111 in Arua, mild bruising
of the vagina was discovered this shows that there was
penetration.
2. Without consent.
This is proved by the victims evidence, medical evidence
as well as any other substantial evidence. In the instant case:
by virtue of Andruru Rose testifying that she was drunk

5. went; to sleep on the veranda but later found herself in a
bush about 40 meters away from her house having sexual
intercourse with a man (accused) When she was rescued by
Bayo Robert and Hellen, the victim remained lying down
totally drunk without knowledge of what had happened as
testified by the two. This shows that Andruru rose hardly
consented to the sexual intercourse.
3. Accused must have committed the unlawful act (rape)
The mere fact that the victim managed to recognise the accused
when he was pulled of her; the sufficient torch light was used
to see the assailant; the witness at the scene also knew the
accused; This shows that the assailant committed the rape.
In relation to the matter in question, the medical evidence
corroborated is prima facie evidence since it was found
sufficient to establish that indeed the accused committed rape.
This explains the hearing of the trial since the medical evidence
was not rebutted.
In addition, in Longwe v Intercontinental Hotels (1993) 41 RC
221. Where the plaintiff who went to the bar of the
intercontinental hotels Lusaka was prohibited from entering
the bar because it was the policy of the hotel not to allow
unaccompanied women (not accompanied with a man) into the
bar consequently, the plaintiff filed a claim before the courts
contending that the policy of the hotel violated her right to
freedom from discrimination. The supreme court of Zambia
held that since the hotel policy only targeted women, it was
discrimination on grounds of sex. In such a case, the oral
evidence given by the plaintiff becomes prima facie evidence

6. proving discrimination of women due to the policy of
intercontinental hotels. The plaintiff’s testimony before court
was sufficient to prove violation of freedom from
discrimination on grounds of sex which established the case
when it was admirable in the legal proceeding. For Uganda’s
context, Article 21, provide for equality and freedom from
discrimination.
In Donoghue v Stevenson
Where the appellant drank a bottle of ginger beer
manufactured by the respondent which a friend bought from a
retailer and gave to her. The bottle contained decomposed
remains of a snail which could not be detected until the greater
part of the beer had been taken since the bottle was opaque.
The appellant suffered from shock and stomach complications.
The respondent objected that he was liable. It was held by
Atkin LJ that a manufacturer of products which he sells in such
a form as to show that he intends them to reach the consumer
in the form in which they left him, with no reasonable
possibility of intermediate examinable and with the knowledge
that in the absence of reasonable care in the preparation or
putting up the products will result into an injury to the
consumer’s life owes a duty to the consumer to take that
reasonable care.
In relation to prima facie evidence, a mere presentation of the
bottle of ginger beer that contained decomposed remains of a
snail by the plaintiff was substantial evidence to show

7. negligence on the part of the manufacturer. Therefore, this was
prima facie evidence that was sufficient to establish the case.
This explains the fact that the prima facie evidence became
conclusive evidence leading to a judgement that showed
negligence on the part of the manufacturer (respondent)
Uganda v Odumuna (2013) UGHCCRD 95
Where the accused was charged with two offences rape and
incest but for purposes of this discussion, incest is in the
spotlight. The accused is alleged to have had sexual intercourse
with Abeja Suzan who was to his knowledge; his daughter; all
of which happened between December 2010 and December
2011. In the instant case; Abeja Susan the victim testified that
she started living with her father; the accused person having
left her matrimonial home during which the father
administered herbs for her to conceive but this was actually a
misrepresentation since it was to weaken her. Initially, while
she was staying with her paternal grandmother (in her house),
the accused began seducing her with threats that he would kill
her if she declined his advances. The accused also directed
threats to the grandmother; which explains the subsequent
molestation of the daughter. Upon death of the grandmother,
the accused relocated the victim to his house where she lived
till his arrest. On corroboration of the evidence from the
witness by the testimonies of Anyong David; the paternal uncle
to the accused person who learnt from the accused mother
Abeja Elizabeth that the accused had turned his daughter into a
wife. The accused’s paternal uncle and his kinsmen followed
up on the matter by going to the accused house in the night of

8. which they discovered that the accused and the victim slept in
the same bed. This was after midnight. Consequently; the
accused was convicted of incest under section 149
In relation to prime facie evidence, the instant case was
established due to the adequacy of the evidence that was
presented by the prosecutor to show that there was indeed
incest committed. According to section 149; having sexual
intercourse with a kinsman, daughter, son, mother, uncle, aunt
amounts to incest hence in the instant case; by having sexual
intercourse with his daughter the accused committed incest.
The corroborated evidence of the victim; Anyong David, the
paternal uncle of the accused Agetu Moses, the clan leader
indicating that the accused committed incest with his daughter
is prima facie evidence that established the case.
Note;
Res Ipsa Loquitur is a maxim which when applied shifts the
burden of proof on the defendant; in a situation where the
plaintiff has provided evidence to show that the defendant
committed an unlawful act.
Res Ipsa Loquitur is an inappropriate form of circumstantial
evidence that enables the plaintiff in certain cases to establish
the defendant’s likely negligence; this entails the plaintiff
taking the defendant to the scene of crime. Otherwise cases on
Res Ipsa Loquitur are more of illustrations of the way in which
the courts can infer negligence from circumstantial evidence.
Case law on Res Ipsa Loquitur.
Ng Chun Pui v Lee Chuen Tat

9. The first defendant was driving a coach owned by the second
defendant westwards in the outer lane of dual carriageway in
Hong Kong. Suddenly the coach crossed the central reservation
and collided with a public bus travelling in the inner lane of the
other carriageway, killing one passenger in the bus and injuring
the driver and three others on the bus. The plaintiffs could not
prove that the defendants were negligent and had caused the
accident. They however proceeded on the basis of Res Ipsa
Loquitur and shifted the onus on the defendants to prove that
they failed to do so. Consequently, the judicial committee of the
Privy Council held that the defendants were liable for the
plaintiff’s injuries.
Contrasting case
Roe v Minister of Health;
Res Ipsa Loquitur cannot apply where an act was not foreseeable;
the plaintiff was admitted to the hospital for minor operations;
the plaintiff was administered spinal anaesthetics by injections of
nupercaine and developed spastic paraplegia. The anaesthetics
were stored in glass ampoules immersed in a solution of phenol
and the judge found that the injuries were caused by phenol
which could have entered the ampoules through flaws not
detectable by visual examination. The plaintiff contented that the
doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur be applied against the hospital as
the injury would not have occurred had the hospital not been
negligent. The court held that the doctrine cannot be applied and
the defendant, cannot be liable as the very occurrence of the
injury or damage was not foreseeable and the cause for the injury
was beyond the control of the defendants. It was said to be a case
of unknown tort-feasance.

10. CONCLUSIVE / INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE.
INTRODUCTION
Conclusive evidence is a form of evidence introduced to prove a fact that is
supposed to be so absolute that there can be no other truth to the matter. In
other words, it is evidence so strong that it over powers contrary evidence,
directing a fact finder to a specific and certain conclusion. Take for
example, a DNA test is conclusive evidence of parenthood, a CCTV camera
footage of a crime taking place. Section 6(3) of the evidence act states that,
“When one fact is declared by this act to be Conclusive proof of another,
the Court shall on proof of that one fact regard the other as proved, and
shall not allow evidence to be given to disregard it.” Conclusive evidence
is explained in the case of Transroad Uganda Limited V Commissioner
Land Registration (2019) UGHCLD 6.
The brief facts of the case are that the complainant brought a suit against
the defendant that the title of ownership that he owned over the land in
Kyadondo was not the right title of ownership and that the land belonged
to the complainant. The courts held that the plaintiffs title was valid and
indefeasible. In regards to S.8 of the Land Act, which states that the proof
of a certificate of customary ownership of land is complete evidence before
the courts of law.
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE.
Refers to the evidence which by law cannot be disputed for example a
written contract, marriage certificate, birth certificate et cetera. A good
example of conclusive evidence is “doli incapax” which simply means that
a child under the age of ten is unable to form the requisite mental intention
required to commit a criminal offence. The penal code provision is S. 162
and 163 which decriminalizes all offenses for which children can be
charged.

11. Another example of conclusive evidence was built in the case of Ham
Enterprise Ltd and 2 Ors vs. Diamond Trust Bank [2020] Commercial
Court. From the above case, the complainants accused Diamond Trust
Bank for operating a banking business in Uganda without a licence. The
above act is contrary to the Financial Institutions Act [2004]
Conclusive evidence refers to the presumption which can not be over come or challenged by
any additional evidence or arguments. Section 3 of the Uganda's evidence Act, is where one
fact is declared by the act to be conclusive proof of another, the court shall on proof of the one
fact, regard the other as proofed and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of
disapproving it.
Legal dictionary definition, it is evidenced that can not be contradicted by any other evidence.
Meaning it is so strong as to over bear any other evidence to the contrary. The evidence is off
such a nature that it compels fact finder to come to a certain conclusion. The evidence as a
matter of law be taken to establish some fact in issue and that can not be disputed for example a
certificate of incorporation of a compony under the company's act is itself conclusive for its
incorporation.
A senrio of conclusive evidence is where ABC and XYZ are married but devorced. In this case,
when the question arises whether ABC and XYZ are husband and wife. If the degree of divorce
is submitted to the court, the court shall presume that they are nolonger husband and wife from
the date of such such degree of divorce. Thus the divorce degree is regard as conclusive proof.
Under section 112 of Uganda's evidence act is to the effect that, Birth during marriage is
conclusive proof during legitimacy. The fact that ay person was born during continuance of a
valid marriage between his mother and any man, or with two hundred and eighty days after it's
desolation the mother remaining unmarried shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate
son of that man unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each
other at any time when he could have been begotten.
Conclusive evidence concerning a murder case can be proofed through the following
ingredients which are: that a death of a human being occured; the death was caused by some
unlawful act; that the unlawful act was actuated malice aforethought; that it was the acused
who caused the unlawful act.
A case to illustrate this is R Vs Kurji vol. 7 EACE 58, In this case, the accused sturbed the
deceased's brother and immediately after he was seen in the godown of the neighbouring shop
standing over the deceased holding a knife, court held that the two circumstances were so
interconnected that the wounding of the deceased's brother must be regarded as part of res
gestoe at the trial of the accused forghe murder of the deceased and the evidence of it was
admissible