Uganda Case Law

Pius Mugerwa Mugalaasi v Attorney General of Uganda and Uganda National Roads Authority

Pius Mugerwa Mugalaasi v Attorney General of Uganda and Uganda National Roads Authority (Civil Suit No. 466 of 2015) [2025] UGHC 281 (30 April 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit No. 466 of 2015

Judge

Asiimwe, J

The court found that the 2nd defendant compulsorily acquired 1.26 acres of the plaintiff's land for the Kampala-Entebbe Expressway project, and that the remainder, though initially gazetted, was not utilized and must be degazetted and returned. Compensation for land must include the value of rock as part of the land, not as a separate item. The plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the 1.26 acres acquired, disturbance allowance, and damages for the period of non-use due to gazettement. The court rejected speculative claims for consequential loss and business opportunity due to lack of evi…

Source excerpt

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Compensation For Land
• Valuation Of Land
• Constitutional Rights Property
• Disturbance Allowance
• Damages And Remedies

Yiga and 7 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority (HCCS 39 of 2021)

Yiga and 7 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority (HCCS 39 of 2021) [2023] UGHCLD 47 (3 March 2023)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

HCCS 39 of 2021

Judge

Basaza, J

The High Court awarded bibanja holders compensation after KCCA’s landfill caused private nuisance and loss of quiet enjoyment, relying on an agreed valuation report.

• Compensation For Bibanja Holders
• Private Nuisance
• Valuation Of Land
• Disturbance Allowance
• Private-nuisance
• Bibanja-compensation

Sheema Cooperative Ranching Society & Ors v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No.103 of 2010)

Sheema Cooperative Ranching Society & Ors v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No.103 of 2010) [2013] UGHCLD 21 (27 February 2013)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

High Court Civil Suit No.103 of 2010

Judge

Aweri-Opio, J

The court found that while the Government's policy to restructure ranches and resettle the landless was lawful and in public interest, the process of acquisition of the Plaintiffs’ land did not comply with the constitutional and statutory requirements. The Government failed to follow the procedures under the Land Acquisition Act, including proper notification, inquiry, and prompt, fair, and adequate compensation. The compensation paid was based on an outdated valuation and did not reflect the market value at the time of payment, nor did it transparently include disturbance allowance. The Plai…

Source excerpt

• Compulsory Acquisition
• Valuation Of Land
• Adequate Compensation
• Disturbance Allowance
• Injurious Affection
• Public Interest

Kinyera v SBI International & Anor

Kinyera v SBI International & Anor (Civil Suit No. 260 of 2006) [2016] UGHCLD 53 (6 December 2016)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit No. 260 of 2006

Judge

Kwesiga, J

The court found that the Plaintiff proved customary ownership of the suit land through succession, occupation, and corroborating evidence. The Defendant failed to establish that it had the Plaintiff's consent to excavate murram, and its entry constituted trespass. The court accepted the Defendant's survey evidence on the quantity of murram removed, awarding compensation based on the established volume and applicable rates. The Plaintiff was also entitled to a disturbance allowance and general damages for loss of use and inconvenience. Interest on the sums and costs of the suit were granted as…

Source excerpt

• Customary Land Tenure
• Trespass To Land
• Compensation For Land
• Disturbance Allowance
• General Damages
• Valuation Of Extracted Materials