Uganda Case Law

Karekaho Byanyima Vennie v Sekanji Umar and Others

Karekaho Byanyima Vennie v Sekanji Umar and Others (Civil Appeal 1 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 306 (20 March 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 1 of 2022

Judge

Wolayo, J

The appellate court found that the appellant lawfully purchased the suit land in 2009, compensated any bibanja holders, and took possession. The first and second respondents (Sekanji and Asiimwe) had agreed with the vendor, Batte Sulaiman, to vacate their interests on Plot 23 in exchange for titles on Plot 25, and thus were estopped from claiming occupancy on the suit land. Their remedy lay against Batte's estate, not the appellant. The fifth respondent (Muyambi) purported to purchase a kibanja from Kasongovu after the appellant had acquired the land, but this sale was void and Kasongovu had…

Source excerpt

• Trespass To Land
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Estoppel
• Sale Of Land
• Injunction

Lukwago v Lubuuka

Lukwago v Lubuuka (Civil Appeal 84 of 2022) [2025] UGHCLD 32 (28 February 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Appeal 84 of 2022

Judge

Naluzze Aisha Batala, J

The High Court dismissed an appeal over a land dispute, upholding findings of valid title, trespass, and general damages after rejecting claims of fraud and Kibanja ownership.

• Land Ownership Disputes
• Trespass To Land
• Fraud In Land Transactions
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Title Indefeasibility
• Land-ownership-disputes

Katumba Tom v Busuulwa Chrizestom

Katumba Tom v Busuulwa Chrizestom (Civil Appeal 15 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 380 (16 January 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 15 of 2023

Judge

Wolayo, J

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial judgment, and held that the respondent failed to prove bona fide occupancy over the disputed land.

• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Kibanja Interest
• Burden Of Proof
• Locus Visit
• Title To Land
• Land-law

Kapta & Another v Mangusho

Kapta & Another v Mangusho (Civil Appeal 142 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 1106 (17 December 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 142 of 2023

Judge

Lubega, J

The court found that the cause of action accrued in 2006 when the respondent's father served notice to the appellants to vacate the land. Subsequent events, including a consent settlement and the purchase of alternative land, led to a fresh cause of action, and the suit was therefore not time-barred under the Limitation Act. The appellants failed to prove that they were bona fide occupants, as their occupation did not meet the statutory twelve-year requirement prior to the 1995 Constitution, and their father's occupation was as a caretaker, not as an owner. The evidence established that the a…

Source excerpt

• Limitation Periods
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Trespass To Land
• Registered Proprietorship

Mugerwa & 85 Others v Kanaba & 2 Others

Mugerwa & 85 Others v Kanaba & 2 Others (Civil Suit 29 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 907 (6 September 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 29 of 2024

Judge

Karemani Jamson K, J

The High Court held that most plaintiffs failed to prove individual claims, but recognized equitable interests in occupied land and ordered correction of the lease and title.

• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Lawful Occupancy
• Land Title Registration
• Land Trespass
• Equitable Interest
• Leasehold Irregularities

Africa & Another v Kyagulani & 3 Others

Africa & Another v Kyagulani & 3 Others (Civil Appeal 76 of 2021) [2024] UGHC 673 (12 July 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 76 of 2021

Judge

Joyce Kavuma, J

The appeal partially succeeds. The court found that the appellants failed to prove ownership or possessory interest sufficient to sustain a claim for trespass, as the suit land fell within the boundaries of registered land belonging to the respondents' late father, evidenced by the certificate of title and survey report. However, the court held that the appellants, having acquired the land from their late mother who occupied it prior to the 1995 Constitution, qualify as bona fide occupants under Section 29(5) of the Land Act. The trial magistrate erred in failing to consider bona fide occupan…

Source excerpt

• Trespass To Land
• Customary Land Tenure
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Boundary Disputes
• Locus In Quo Procedure

Okwel v Kasaliko and 3 Others

Okwel v Kasaliko and 3 Others (Civil Suit 928 of 2019) [2024] UGHCLD 124 (24 May 2024)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit 928 of 2019

Judge

Keitirima, J

The High Court held that the defendants were trespassers on registered land in Ndeeba, ordered eviction and vacant possession, and awarded UGX 50 million in damages.

• Trespass To Land
• Registration Of Titles
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Succession And Administration
• Remedies For Trespass
• Trespass-to-land

Kachira Investment Company Limited v Mbale Municipal Council and 2 Others

Kachira Investment Company Limited v Mbale Municipal Council and 2 Others (Civil Appeal 33 of 2021) [2024] UGSC 9 (17 May 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 33 of 2021

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Mwondha, JSC, Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Madrama , JSC

The Supreme Court held that the lower courts correctly found that Plot 15A Bishop Wasike Road existed before Plot 20 Malukhu Road and that the suit property is properly described as Plot 15A Bishop Wasike Road. The abolition of statutory leases under the 1995 Constitution did not automatically extinguish the rights of the 1st respondent, whose lease was still running at the time of the constitutional change. The 2nd respondent was a sitting tenant with lawful occupancy, and the subsequent transactions between the respondents were valid. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the lower court…

Source excerpt

• Statutory Leases
• Public Land Allocation
• Lease Conversion
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Title Registration
• Land Disputes

Hakiri & 2 Others v Attorney General & 31 Others

Hakiri & 2 Others v Attorney General & 31 Others (Civil Appeal 14 of 2023) [2024] UGSC 18 (16 April 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 14 of 2023

Judge

Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC, Elizabeth Musoke, JSC, Stephen Musota, JSC, Christopher Madrama Izama, JSC

The Supreme Court affirmed the concurrent findings of the trial and appellate courts that the appellants were evicted from the suit land in 1992, not 2004. Consequently, their suit filed in 2005 was time barred under section 5 of the Limitation Act, as more than 12 years had elapsed since the accrual of the cause of action. The appellants failed to establish status as customary tenants or bona fide occupants, as their occupation was by Government license and not under customary law or unchallenged for the requisite period. The court held that the law of limitation applies strictly, and no sta…

Source excerpt

• Limitation Periods
• Eviction Procedure
• Customary Tenure
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Compulsory Acquisition
• Trespass To Land

Akiding and 3 Others v Dheyongera and Another (HCT-00-LD-CS 2243 of 2016)

Akiding and 3 Others v Dheyongera and Another (HCT-00-LD-CS 2243 of 2016) [2023] UGHCLD 259 (22 August 2023)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

HCT-00-LD-CS 2243 of 2016

Judge

Bernard Namanya, J

The High Court held that the disputed land was not part of the deceased’s estate, upheld the second defendant’s gift and sale to the first defendant, but ordered return of excess land.

• Succession And Administration
• Bona Fide Occupancy
• Land Gifting
• Sale Of Unregistered Land
• Injunctive Relief
• Succession-and-administration