Share
In The Matter of Application For Guardianship by Nakazindo and Other v Nanyondo and Another (Family And Children’s Cause 1 of 2022) [2022] UGHCFD 13 (17 March 2022)
- Citation
- [2022] UGHCFD 13
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Family Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Ojok, J
- Case number
- Family And Children’s Cause 1 of 2022
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Family Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Ojok, J
- Case number
- Family And Children’s Cause 1 of 2022
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant is the biological mother of the minors, has been their primary caregiver, and has demonstrated intent to act in their best interests. The property in question was acquired and registered in both her name and those of the minors, and the applicant seeks to manage it for their benefit. There is no evidence of adverse interest or incapacity. The court held that, in accordance with constitutional and statutory mandates prioritizing the welfare and best interests of children, the applicant is a suitable person to be granted guardianship and authorized to deal with the property on behalf of the minors. The application was therefore allowed.
Court disposition
application allowed
Orders
- A guardianship order of the children Nanyonjo Grace and Kazibwe Gracecius is issued to the applicant with all necessary directions.
- An order is granted authorizing all dealings on land/title Block 83 Plot 53 Mpigi Mawokota, including subdivision, sale, lease, title transfer, and any other dealings as may be required by the applicant.
- Applicant bears her own costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Nakazindo Dorothy Nakamya
Applicant Counsel: M/s Xander AdvocatesNanyonjo Grace
RespondentKazibwe Gracecius
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Family and Children Cause / Ruling on Guardianship Application
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether it is in the best interest of the children that the Applicant be granted a guardianship order.
- 02
Whether the Applicant should be authorized to deal with the property registered in the names of the minors.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant, as the biological mother of the minors, seeks a guardianship order to manage property registered in her and her children's names. She argues that her intention is to use the property and any proceeds for the welfare and benefit of the children. Counsel emphasizes the paramountcy of the children's welfare and best interests, citing constitutional and statutory provisions, and asserts that the applicant has no adverse interests to those of the minors.
- Respondent
- There was no formal respondent or opposition; the application was unopposed.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995; Section 3(1) of the Children Act
The welfare and best interests of the child are paramount in all matters concerning children.
- 02
Trevor Mugumu (child), Family Cause No. 68/2019
A biological parent is generally the best person to provide care for the child and protect the child's property rights until majority age.
- 03
In the matter of an application for guardianship by Ronald Kamusiime, Miscellaneous Application No. 48 of 2016
Courts may grant guardianship orders to biological parents or others who demonstrate intent for the welfare of children who own property.
- 04
Section 1 of the 1st Schedule under Section 3 and Section 3(a) of the Children Act
The proposed guardian's interests must not be adverse to those of the minor, and the guardian must be capable of meeting the minor's physical, emotional, and educational needs.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant is the biological mother of the minors, has been their primary caregiver, and has demonstrated intent to act in their best interests. The property in question was acquired and registered in both her name and those of the minors, and the applicant seeks to manage it for their benefit. There is no evidence of adverse interest or incapacity. The court held that, in accordance with constitutional and statutory mandates prioritizing the welfare and best interests of children, the applicant is a suitable person to be granted guardianship and authorized to deal with the property on behalf of the minors. The application was therefore allowed.
Obiter and limits
- The welfare of the children is the court's sole concern and other facts are relevant only to the extent that they assist in ascertaining the best solution for the child.
- A biological parent is generally best placed to protect a child's property interests until the child attains majority age.
Court disposition
application allowed
- A guardianship order of the children Nanyonjo Grace and Kazibwe Gracecius is issued to the applicant with all necessary directions.
- An order is granted authorizing all dealings on land/title Block 83 Plot 53 Mpigi Mawokota, including subdivision, sale, lease, title transfer, and any other dealings as may be required by the applicant.
- Applicant bears her own costs.
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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT MPIGI
FAMILY AND CHILDREN CAUSE NO. 01 OF 2022
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION OF GUARDIANSHIP BY NAKAZINDO DOROTHY NAKAMYA [THE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER OF NANYONJO GRACE (15 YRS) AND KAZIBWE GRACECIUS (12YRS) [MINORS].
AND
IN THE MATTER OF NANYONJO GRACE AND KAZIBWE GRACECIUS.
BEFORE: LORDSHIP HON. JUSTICE OYUKO ANTHONY OJOK, JUDGE $\overline{10}$
RULING
This is an application brought under Sections 3,4,5, and 6 of the Children Act, Section 98 of the civil Procedure Act and Order 52 rules 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking the following orders:
$\mathbf{1}$ A Guardianship order of the children, Nanyonjo Grace (15 years) and Kazibwe Gracecius (12 years) be issued to the Applicant with all necessary directions.
- An order be granted authorizing all dealings on land/title Block 83 Plot 53 Mpigi Mawokota, Subdivision, sale, lease, title transfer and any other as the same may be required by the Applicant. - Such orders as the court may deem fit to grant. $\overline{3}$
The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by, Nakizindo Dorothy Nakamya and the grounds briefly are as follows
1 | Page
$\overline{2}$
- 1) That sometime in September, 2015, the Applicant acquired land comprised in Mawokota, Mpigi Block 83 Plot 53. - 2) That the Applicant decided to have the land registered in her names and her children Nanyonjo Grace (15 years) and Kazibwe Gracecuis (12 years). - 3) That registration was effected on 4<sup>th</sup> March, 2015 and a duplicate Certificate of title was issued to her. - 4) That the applicant is desirous of dealing with the above mentioned property and using the proceeds for the well being of her children in which case the grant of a guardianship order is a perquisite.
Issue: 10
Whether it is in the best interest of the children that the Applicant be granted a guardianship order?
Representation:
M/s Xander Advocates represented the applicant and filed written submissions.
Resolution of issue:
Whether it is in the best interest of the children that the Applicant be granted a guardianship order?
Counsel for the applicant cited Article 34 Of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 and Section 3 (1) of the Children Act as the law considered while dealing with issues concerning children and their welfare being paramount in such matters.
Counsel emphasized the welfare and best interest of the children as being paramount and relied on Bromely's Family Law, 8<sup>th</sup> Edition, at page 336, where it was stated that:
2 | Page
"....the children's welfare is the court's sole concern and other facts are relevant only to the extent that they can assist the court in ascertaining the best solution for the child....."
Counsel noted that according to the birth certificates attached to the application the Applicant is the biological mother of the children and as such has the constitutional duty to raise and cater for them. Counsel relied on the case of Trevor Mugumu (child), Family Cause No. 68/2019, where court held that;
"In my view a biological parent is the best person to provide care for the child and ensure that the child's rights, including property rights, are protected and preserved until he/she is of age. In most instances the child has to come to own property because the parent has gifted or bequeathed it. So where a child has property it should in the most ideal situations be protected by the biological parent until the child is of majority age."
Counsel for the applicant added that to harness the rights of a child to own property and to benefit it without jeopardizing their welfare, courts have granted guardianship orders to biological parents and other people who have demonstrated that their intention is for the welfare of the children who own property as per the case In the matter of an application for guardianship by Ronald Kamusiime, Miscellaneous application No. 48 of 2016.
Further, that the applicant's interests must not be adverse to those of the minor, and that the minor's physical, emotional and educational needs should be sufficiently taken over once the order is granted. (See Section 1 of the 1<sup>st</sup> Schedule under Section 3 of the Children Act and Section 3 (a) of the same Act).
Counsel implored court to look at the capabilities of the applicant, potential conflicts of the proposed guardian and that in the circumstances the Applicant is the biological parent of the minors and meets the capability test and she does not have any adverse interest to those of the minors.
I have carefully considered the submissions for the Applicant, the law cited and authorities relied on. I entirely agree with the submissions for the applicant that 3 | Page
in dealing with issues concerning children, it is paramount to consider their welfare and best interests. That the Applicant's interest should not be adverse to those of the minors and all the minors' needs ought to be fully taken care of.
In the instant case the Applicant is the biological mother of the minors as proved by the birth certificates attached to the application who bought the suit property and had it registered in both her name and that of the minors. The Applicant is now desirous of dealing with the property for the benefit and wellbeing of the minors and such proceeds as represents the minors' interest in the property. The duplicate certificate was also attached to the application and indeed the property is registered in the applicant's name and those of the minors.
I find and hold that the applicant as the biological parent of the minors and is the one that has been taking care of them is a suitable person to whom this order should be granted for the best interest of the said minors. This issue is therefore resolved in the affirmative.
This application is hereby allowed with the following orders:
- 1. A guardianship order of the Children Nanyonjo Grace (15years) and Kazibwe Gracecius (12 years) is issued to the Applicant with all necessary directions. - 2. An order is granted authorizing all dealings, on land/title comprised in 83 Plot 53, at Mpigi Mawokota, sub division, sale, lease, title Block transfer and any other as the same may be required by the Applicant. - 3. Applicant bears her own costs.
............... OYUKO ANTHONY OJOK JUDGE 17/03/2022.
4 | Page
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.