Lubega v Namwandu Robina Ntege
Lubega v Namwandu Robina Ntege (CIVIL APPEAL NO. 80 OF 2009) [2017] UGHCCD 162 (22 June 2017)
The court found that the late Ntege was in possession of and had contributed to the construction of the suit lock up shop prior to the appellant's alleged purchase. The evidence presented by the appellant and his witnesses, particularly PW1, was riddled with contradictions and lacked credibility. Documentary evidence from Natete Market Development Co. Ltd supported the respondent's claim to ownership. The court concluded that the appellant had no valid claim to the lock up shop, and any money paid to PW1 should be refunded. The trial Magistrate's evaluation of the evidence was correct, and th…
Source excerpt
- Market Lock Up Ownership
- Double Allocation
- Evidence Evaluation
- Possession And Construction