Uganda Case Law

Kaahwa v Attorney General

Kaahwa v Attorney General (Civil Suit 29 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 106 (10 January 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 29 of 2023

Judge

Byaruhanga Rugyema, J

The court found that the Defendant's valuation failed to apply the market value principle and did not consider comparable sales or rental capacities, resulting in unfair and inadequate compensation. The Plaintiff's private valuation, based on the income approach and supported by evidence of rental agreements and comparable properties, was found to be more reliable and reflective of the true market value. The court held that compensation for compulsory acquisition must be fair and adequate, and that the Plaintiff is entitled to the higher valuation. The Defendant's rejection of the Plaintiff's…

Source excerpt

• Compulsory Land Acquisition
• Compensation Assessment
• Valuation Methods
• Market Value Principle
• General Damages
• Special Damages

Katamba v Uganda National Roads Authority

Katamba v Uganda National Roads Authority (Civil Suit No. 18 of 2021) [2022] UGHCCD 59 (10 March 2022)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit No. 18 of 2021

Judge

Ojok, J

The High Court found the plaintiff failed to prove a gazetted cultural site or trespass, upheld the compensation assessment, and dismissed the suit.

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Compensation Assessment
• Cultural Heritage Claims
• Valuation Of Land
• Trespass To Land
• Compulsory-acquisition

Uganda National Road Authority v Prof. Ndungutse

Uganda National Road Authority v Prof. Ndungutse (Miscellaneous Cause No. 8 of 2021) [2021] UGHCCD 102 (7 September 2021)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 8 of 2021

Judge

Byaruhanga Rugyema, J

The High Court held that it could proceed to determine the application despite a pending constitutional petition, as no new constitutional questions were raised. The court found that the applicant had complied with the Land Acquisition Act by assessing and offering compensation, and that the respondents' refusal to accept the award did not preclude the applicant from depositing the sums in court. The respondents' claims regarding the value of rock on the land were unsupported by any alternative valuation or evidence of a mining licence, and thus did not justify a higher award. The court empha…

Source excerpt

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Compensation Assessment
• Public Projects
• Right To Property
• Court Jurisdiction
• Constitutional Interpretation

Mukisa Mpewo Enterprises Ltd v Kampala City Authority (Misc.Application No. 590 of 2013)

Mukisa Mpewo Enterprises Ltd v Kampala City Authority (Misc.Application No. 590 of 2013) [2014] UGHCCD 48 (28 March 2014)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc.Application No. 590 of 2013

The High Court awarded Mukisa Mpewo Enterprises Ltd UGX 5.2 billion after finding Kampala Capital City Authority had not fully complied with a prior order granting a lease or compensation.

• Compensation Assessment
• Leasehold Tenure
• Vacant Possession
• Court Orders Enforcement
• Land-law
• Leasehold

Malde and Co. Ex parte, Indian Land Acquisition Act

Malde and Co. Ex parte, Indian Land Acquisition Act (Miscellaneous Civil Suit No. 2 of 1953) [1954] EACA 1 (1 January 1954)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Miscellaneous Civil Suit No. 2 of 1953

Judge

Harley J

A land acquisition reference on valuing a leasehold plot in Nairobi. The court held future development may be considered, but only on a prudent, non-speculative basis.

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Valuation Of Land
• Compensation Assessment
• Market Value Determination
• Leasehold Interest
• Costs Award

Hubble v Commissioner for Transport

Hubble v Commissioner for Transport (Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1951) [1952] EACA 97 (1 January 1952)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1951

Judge

Hearne CJ, Nihill P, Worley VP

The Court held that railway realignment over leased Crown land was lawfully effected under the Crown Lands Ordinance, not the Railway Ordinance, and dismissed the appeal.

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Crown Lands
• Railway Realignment
• Compensation Assessment
• Delegation Of Statutory Powers
• Compulsory-acquisition