Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Nabwiire Jane v Nanteza Irene (Civil Appeal No. 133 of 2022) [2025] UGCA 237 (18 July 2025)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a second appeal over disputed land possession, holding that an unadmitted kibanja sale agreement could not be relied on and that factual grounds were not open on second appeal.
Ssalongo Lwanga Gerald v Mulindwa Musa and Others (Civil Suit No. 73 of 2020) [2025] UGHC 562 (18 June 2025)
The plaintiff established his status as a bona fide occupant of the suit land by virtue of long, unchallenged occupation and payment of ground rent, supported by documentary evidence. The defendants failed to contest the claim, and the 2nd defendant's eviction of the plaintiff was unlawful. The plaintiff did not meet all statutory requirements for a vesting order, particularly full payment of the purchase price and exhaustion of administrative remedies. Special damages and mesne profits were not proved and thus disallowed. The plaintiff was awarded general damages for loss of quiet enjoyment…
Source excerpt
Ssozi and Another v Mawanda (CIVIL APPEAL NO.24 OF 2023; CONSOLIDATED CIVIL APPEAL NO. 06 OF 2023) [2025] UGHC 213 (16 April 2025)
The court found that the respondent, Patrick Mawanda, is a bonafide occupant of the suit Kibanja by virtue of purchasing from Christine Birabwa Nsubuga, who herself acquired the Kibanja from Leo Kamya Ssalongo, a long-term occupant. The evidence established that the respondent took possession and cultivated the land without challenge from the registered owner, satisfying the requirements of Section 29(2) and (5) of the Land Act. The appellants' argument regarding lack of written consent was rejected, as the registered owner at the time of purchase was not the current appellant, and the conduc…
Source excerpt
Kitto (Administrator of the Estate of the late Dr. John Chrysostom Kiyimba Kitto) v Athena Investments Limited (Civil Suit 264 of 2017) [2025] UGHCLD 50 (28 March 2025)
The High Court found the plaintiff was a lawful occupant of the land, held the defendant’s leasehold acquisition unlawful, and awarded damages and cancellation.
Kisitu v Kavuma & Another (Civil Suit 108 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 1190 (9 December 2024)
The High Court held that the defendants were bonafide occupants, not trespassers, on the disputed kibanja and dismissed the plaintiff’s trespass claim.
Mahe v Tumuhairwe (HCCA 29 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 703 (26 July 2024)
High Court appeal over disputed land ownership and occupancy: title upheld, but the respondent’s family was recognized as bonafide occupants of part of the land.
Sserufusa v Kazibwe (Civil Appeal 22 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 699 (8 July 2024)
The High Court allowed an appeal over a land dispute, holding that the respondent failed to prove bonafide occupancy and was a trespasser on the suit land.
Kavuma v Owori (Civil Appeal 13 of 2021) [2024] UGHC 541 (19 June 2024)
The court found that the respondent lawfully acquired the kibanja interest in 2007 from the family of the late Kikutte Bashir, with the consent of the then landlady Norah Buswa, prior to the appellant's registration as proprietor in 2009. The evidence established that the respondent was in quiet possession and recognized as a kibanja holder before the appellant's acquisition of mailo title. The appellant failed to prove that the respondent was a trespasser, as the respondent's interest was protected under section 29(5) of the Land Act, which recognizes successors to bonafide occupancy. The co…
Source excerpt
Kisoke and Another v Katalihwa (Civil Appeal 20 of 2021) [2024] UGHC 219 (19 April 2024)
The High Court found that the respondent failed to prove direct descent from Kadoma Kyampamba and that neither he nor his father ever used or possessed the suit land. The evidence demonstrated that the appellants and their family had occupied and developed the land for over 40 years, qualifying them as owners through adverse possession. The trial magistrate erred by relying on local council judgments that were nullified by the Chief Magistrate, and by accepting the claim of Kiiza Jeles as caretaker without sufficient evidence. The appellants did not plead bonafide occupancy, so the court coul…
Source excerpt
Sekyanzi v Prof . Wavamuno (Miscellaneous Application 37 of 2020) [2023] UGSC 28 (27 July 2023)
The Supreme Court determined that the applicant's intended appeal raises a substantial question regarding the interpretation of bonafide occupancy under Ugandan law, specifically whether a person who inherited land from a predecessor who died before the 1995 Constitution qualifies as a bonafide occupant. The court found that this issue is of sufficient general and public importance, as its resolution could affect a significant number of Ugandans with similar inheritance claims. The court emphasized its discretionary power to grant leave in order to do justice, noting that it is not limited to…
Source excerpt
