Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Zam Kalule Nakiyingi v Enock Sebunya (Family Cause 191 of 2014) [2016] UGHCFD 4 (3 February 2016)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The applicant, as the biological mother and legal guardian of the minor, seeks authorization to dispose of land registered in the minor's name to meet his educational and maintenance needs. The minor, who is of understanding age, does not oppose the sale and confirms it is for his welfare. The court finds that the best interests of the child, as mandated by the Constitution and the Children Act, are served by granting the application. The applicant has provided sufficient evidence of her guardianship, the minor's age and understanding, and the necessity of the sale for the minor's welfare. The court is satisfied that the disposal of the property is justified and in accordance with the legal principles governing the welfare of children.

Court disposition

application_granted

Orders

  • The applicant is authorized to dispose of land known as Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 at Kikaya currently in the names of Enock Sebunya a minor.
  • Costs of this application will be met by the applicant.

02

Material facts

Parties

Zam Kalule Nakiyingi

Applicant

Enock Sebunya

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Family Cause / Ruling

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant, as the biological mother and legal guardian of Enock Sebunya, seeks authorization to sell land registered in the minor's name to meet his educational and maintenance needs. She asserts that the sale is necessary for the minor's welfare and has provided supporting documentation, including the minor's birth certificate, the father's death certificate, and the land title. The minor, who is of understanding age, does not oppose the sale and confirms it is for his benefit.
Respondent
The minor, Enock Sebunya, attended court and was examined on oath. He confirmed that the applicant is his biological mother and legal guardian and stated that he is not opposed to the disposal of the land, as it is intended to cater for his interests and welfare.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Article 34 of the Constitution of Uganda; Children Act Cap 59

    The best interests of the child must be the primary consideration in all matters concerning children.

  2. 02

    Article 139(1) of the Constitution; Section 14, 33, & 39 of the Judicature Act Cap 13; Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 71

    The High Court has unlimited original jurisdiction and inherent powers to grant remedies where no specific provisions exist.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The applicant, as the biological mother and legal guardian of the minor, seeks authorization to dispose of land registered in the minor's name to meet his educational and maintenance needs. The minor, who is of understanding age, does not oppose the sale and confirms it is for his welfare. The court finds that the best interests of the child, as mandated by the Constitution and the Children Act, are served by granting the application. The applicant has provided sufficient evidence of her guardianship, the minor's age and understanding, and the necessity of the sale for the minor's welfare. The court is satisfied that the disposal of the property is justified and in accordance with the legal principles governing the welfare of children.

Obiter and limits

  • The applicant is a single mother facing difficulty in meeting the minor's education and maintenance, which further justifies the need for the sale.
  • The original documents provided matched the annexed photocopies, confirming the authenticity of the evidence.

Court disposition

application_granted

  • The applicant is authorized to dispose of land known as Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 at Kikaya currently in the names of Enock Sebunya a minor.
  • Costs of this application will be met by the applicant.

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

[2016] UGHCFD 4

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

FAMILY DIVISION

FAMILY CAUSE 191 OF 2014

ARISING OUT OF FAMILY CAUSE NO 137 OF 2010

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO DISPOSE OF LAND KNOWN AS KYADONDO BLOCK 211 PLOT 1007 BY ZAM KALULE NAKIYINGI (MOTHER)

BEFORE LADY JUSTICE PERCY NIGHT TUHAISE

RULING

This is an application for legal guardianship brought by notice of motion under Article 139(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda; sections 14, 33, & 39 of the Judicature Act cap 13; section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act cap 71; and Order 52 rules 1, 2 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71 -1. The applicant is seeking to be authorized to dispose of land known as Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 at Kikaya currently in the names of Enock Sebunya, a minor.

The application is based on grounds that the applicant is the biological mother of Enock Sebunya a minor, having begotten him with the late Samuel Kalule who died on 19/08/ 2003; and that it is in the interests of the child that the application be granted. The application is supported by the affidavit of the applicant. In addition to her supporting affidavit, the applicant attended court and was interviewed on oath. Enock Sebunyathe subject of the application also attended court. He was examined on oath by court after being found to be of understanding age.

The background is that the applicant (Zam Nakiyingi Kalule) who is the biological mother of Enock Sebunya (the minor), was appointed a legal guardian of the minor by this court in Family Cause No. 137/2010. She brought this application to enable her sell land comprised in Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 land at Kikaya registered in the names of the minor to meet the minor’s needs.

Article 139(1) of the Constitution, read with section 14 of the Judicature Act, cap 13, give the High Court unlimited original jurisdiction in all matters. Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act empowers the High Court to invoke its inherent powers to grant remedies where there are no specific provisions. In all matters concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration. This is a legal principle contained in Article 34 of the Constitution, the Children Act, and various international conventions ratified by Uganda concerning the rights of children.

The best interests of the child set out by the Children Act include the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child in light of his or her age and understanding; the child’s physical, emotional and educational needs; the child’s age, background; and other circumstances relevant in the matter.

The adduced evidence shows that the applicant is the biological mother of the minor and also his legal guardian. She begot the child with Samuel Kalule who passed away on 19/08/2003. The applicant and the late Sam Kalule had bought the land in question and registered it in the names of the minor. The applicant is a single mother finding it difficult to meet the minor’s education and maintenance. The mother of the child wants to sell the land to raise money to meet the minor’s school requirements, maintenance and continued sustenance. The child himself stated to court on oath that the applicant was his biological mother and that he is not opposed to his mother disposing of the land to cater for his interests.

The applicant annexed photocopies of the late Samuel Kalule’s death certificate and the minor’s birth certificate to her supporting affidavit as A and B respectively. She also annexed the certificate of title to the land comprised Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 at Kikaya as E to her supporting affidavit. The original documents were later availed to court and they matched the annexed photocopies. Annexture B shows the minor is aged about fifteen years, having been born on 05/11/2000, while annexture A showsthat Samuel Kalule the minor’s father died. Annextur E confirms that the land is registered in the names of the minor.

In this case, where the applicant, who is minor’s biological mother and legal guardian seeks an order that will enable her to dispose of the minors’ land, and where the minor, who is of understanding age, is not opposed to the sale, stating that it is for his welfare, such order should be granted as it is for the welfare and best interests of the minor. In any case the applicant is the minor’s legal guardian and she has powers to make decisions on behalf of the minor.

I accordingly make the following orders:-

1. The applicant is authorized to dispose of land known as Kyadondo Block 211 Plot 1007 at Kikaya currently in the names of Enock Sebunya a minor.

2. Costs of this application will be met by the applicant.

Dated at Kampala this 03rd day of February 2016.

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.

Article 139(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 14, 33, & 39 of the Judicature Act Cap 13

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 71

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Order 52 rules 1, 2 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Article 34 of the Constitution of Uganda

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Children Act Cap 59

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.