Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Buye & Ors v Ssenyange (Miscellaneous Cause No. 15 of 2015) [2015] UGHCFD 44 (14 December 2015)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the applicants, as surviving executors, are entitled under the Succession Act to administer the estate following the death of one executor and the absence of another. The law vests powers in the survivors, and the continued listing of the deceased and absent executors on the grant impedes the proper administration and distribution of the estate. The respondent has not renounced his duties, but his non-participation and inability to be traced justify removal from the grant. The court exercised its inherent powers under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to amend the probate grant, remove the deceased and absent executors, and vest authority in the applicants to manage, liquidate, and distribute the estate to the beneficiaries as per the agreed scheme.

Court disposition

application_granted

Orders

  • The probate in Probate and Administration Cause No 770/1999 is amended to remove the late Justine Busingye Mwanje and Dr. Samuel Ssenyange as executors.
  • The applicants are vested with authority to manage and administer the entire estate of the late Charles Mwanje.
  • The applicants are permitted to liquidate and distribute the estate of the late Charles Mwanje.

02

Material facts

Parties

Joseph Buye

Applicant

Thomas Semakula

Applicant

Richard Ssenabulya

Applicant

Kirema Mukasa

Applicant

Dr. Samuel Ssenyange

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicants argued that after the grant of probate, the respondent disappeared and did not participate in administering the estate, while Justine Busingye Mwanje passed away. The remaining administrators have prepared a distribution scheme agreed upon by all beneficiaries, but cannot transfer the estate due to the continued listing of the deceased and absent executors. They requested the court to amend the grant to remove these names and vest authority in the applicants to conclude administration and distribute the estate.
Respondent
The respondent did not file any response or participate in the proceedings. There is no evidence of renunciation of duties or objection to the application.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 187, Succession Act

    On the death of one of the executors, the entire representation of the estate accrues to the surviving executor(s).

  2. 02

    Section 273, Succession Act

    Upon the death of one or more of several executors or administrators, all the powers of the office become vested in the survivor(s).

  3. 03

    Section 272, Succession Act

    Where there are many executors, their power may be executed by one of them.

  4. 04

    Section 98, Civil Procedure Act

    The court has inherent powers to make orders necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the applicants, as surviving executors, are entitled under the Succession Act to administer the estate following the death of one executor and the absence of another. The law vests powers in the survivors, and the continued listing of the deceased and absent executors on the grant impedes the proper administration and distribution of the estate. The respondent has not renounced his duties, but his non-participation and inability to be traced justify removal from the grant. The court exercised its inherent powers under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to amend the probate grant, remove the deceased and absent executors, and vest authority in the applicants to manage, liquidate, and distribute the estate to the beneficiaries as per the agreed scheme.

Obiter and limits

  • The Succession Act is silent on executors who neglect their duties except where negligence causes loss, in which case section 333 would be invoked.
  • The applicants have done all that is required of them as administrators to conclude the administration of the estate but are hampered by the existence of names of administrators that cannot sign transfers due to death and absence.

Court disposition

application_granted

  • The probate in Probate and Administration Cause No 770/1999 is amended to remove the late Justine Busingye Mwanje and Dr. Samuel Ssenyange as executors.
  • The applicants are vested with authority to manage and administer the entire estate of the late Charles Mwanje.
  • The applicants are permitted to liquidate and distribute the estate of the late Charles Mwanje.

Source and reliance status

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Judgment

[2015] UGHCFD 44

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

FAMILY DIVISION

MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO 15/2015

ARISING FROM PROBATE CAUSE NO 770/1999

1. JOSEPH BUYE 2. THOMAS SSEMAKULA 3. RICHARD SSENABULYA 4. KIREMA MUKASA……………………………………………………. APPLICANTS

VERSUS

DR. SAMUEL SSENYANGE………………………………………………RESPONDENT

BEFORE HON LADY JUSTICE PERCY NIGHT TUHAISE

RULING

This was an application by notice of motion brought under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 52 rules 1 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) for orders that the probate in Probate and Administration Cause No 770/1999 be amended to remove the late Justine Busingye Mwanje and Dr. Samuel Ssenyange as executors; that the applicants be vested with authority to manage and administer the entire estate of the late Charles Mwanje; and that the applicants be permitted to liquidate and distribute the estate of the late Charles Mwanje.

The application is supported by the affidavit of Joseph Mary Buye the 1st applicant. It is based on the grounds that the applicants together with the respondent and the late Justine Busingye Mwanje were granted probate of the will of the late Charles Mwanje vide Probate and Administration Cause No. 770/1999 to manage his estate; that the respondent disappeared immediately after the grant was issued; that Justine Busingye Mwanje passed away in January 2014; that the respondent neglected his duties in relation to the administration; that the applicants filed an inventory of the estate of the properties; that the beneficiaries of the estate are now of age and want the estate distributed among them in line with the distribution scheme prepared by the administrators which they have accepted.

The applicants’ evidence is that they, together with the respondent, are the executors of the will of the late Charles Mwanje vide AC 770/1999. The respondent did not participate in the administering of the estate because he disappeared immediately after the grant was issued. The other administrators administered the estate including filing an inventory of the estate in this court. One of the administrators Busingye Justine has since passed on. The administrators have prepared a distribution scheme agreed on by all the beneficiaries and filed it in court but they cannot transfer the estate to the beneficiaries unless Justine Busingye, who is dead, and the respondent who cannot be traced, is removed from the grant.

The applicants annexed various documents to the 1st applicant’s affidavit to support their case, including a copy of the will of the late Charles Mwanje; a copy of the grant in AC 770/1999; a copy of the death certificate of Justine Busingye; and copies of the inventory and the distribution scheme of the estate of the late Charles Mwanje.

Section 187 of the Succession Act provides that on the death of one of the executors, the entire representation of the estate accrues to the surviving executor or executors. Section 273 of the same Act states that upon the death of one or more of several executors or administrators all the powers of the office become vested in the survivor or survivors. Section 272 states that where there are many executors, their power may be executed by one of them. Thus, based on the said provisions of the law, it is my opinion that on the death of Justine Busingye, the administration of the estate of the late Charles Mwanje accrued to surviving executors.

Regarding the absence or non participation of the respondent in administering the estate of the late Charles Mwanje, the Succession Act is silent on executors who neglect their duties except when the negligence causes loss, in which case section 333 would be invoked. In this case the applicants have proved that the respondent did not participate in the administration of the estate. There is nothing to show that the respondent has ever renounced his duties as administrator of the estate of the late Charles Mwanje. Yet the circumstances of the case are that the beneficiaries of the estate and the other administrators want to finalize the administration of the estate by transferring the estate to the rightful beneficiaries. They cannot do this while the names of the respondent and the deceased are still on the grant as administrators.

Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act cap 71 empowers this court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. In this case it is evident the applicants can only be able to transfer the estate to the respective beneficiaries if the names of the deceased administrator and the absent administrator are removed from the grant. They have done all that is required of them as administrators to conclude the administration of the estate but are hampered from transferring the same to the rightful beneficiaries due to the existence of names of administrators that cannot sign transfers due to death and absence.

In that respect I would invoke this court’s inherent powers and direct that the probate in Probate and Administration Cause No 770/1999 be amended to remove the late Justine Busingye Mwanje and Dr. Samuel Ssenyange as executors; that the applicants be vested with authority to manage and administer the entire estate of the late Charles Mwanje; and that the applicants be permitted to liquidate and distribute the estate of the late Charles Mwanje.

It is so ordered.

Dated at Kampala this 14th day of December 2015.

Percy Night Tuhaise

Judge.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Section 98, Civil Procedure Act Cap 71

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Order 52 rules 1 & 3, Civil Procedure Rules

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 187, Succession Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 273, Succession Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 272, Succession Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.