Kisugu Quarries Ltd v Administrator General (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1998)

Supreme Court · [1999] UGSC 40 · 1999 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

Second appeal to the Supreme Court from the Court of Appeal in a civil suit concerning the validity of a leasehold title.

Decision

Appeal dismissed with costs; the lease was held null and void ab initio and the repossession certificate of no effect.

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 8 (treatment unverified) Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. A lease of mailo land to a non-African company executed in 1970 without the Minister's consent required by section 2 of the Land Transfer Act is null and void ab initio, and no subsequent act, including a repossession certificate under the Expropriated Properties Act, can validate it. Where no valid lease vested in the Government at expropriation, there was nothing to repossess, so the certificate had no effect and the lower courts rightly ignored it. Illegality, once before the court, must be acted upon even though raised only in defence. The appellant's evidence did not prove on a balance of probabilities that ministerial consent was ever obtained.

Facts

Kisugu Quarries Ltd, a non-African company wholly owned by Asians, was granted a lease of mailo land (a stone quarry at Kisugu) by Paulo Kiddu Musisi in 1970. The lease was executed without a copy of any ministerial consent required under the Land Transfer Act. In 1972 the company's shareholders fled Uganda during the expulsion of Asians; the property was taken over by Government, managed by the Departed Asian Property Custodian Board, and leased to Stone Sales (U) Ltd. After the Expropriated Properties Act 1982, the company obtained a repossession certificate, evicted Stone Sales and took possession. When it sought to register the repossession, the Administrator General, who held letters of administration to the deceased lessor's estate, exercised the lessor's power of re-entry and threatened eviction. The company sued to resist eviction, relying on its leasehold title and the repossession certificate. The respondent pleaded that the 1970 lease was illegal for want of ministerial consent.

Issues

Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the validity of the lease despite an unchallenged repossession certificate issued under the Expropriated Properties Act.
Whether the appellant's 1970 lease of mailo land was null and void for want of ministerial consent under section 2 of the Land Transfer Act.
Whether the courts below set too high a standard of proof for establishing that ministerial consent had been obtained.

Orders

Appeal dismissed.
Decisions of the Court of Appeal and the High Court upheld.
Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent in the Supreme Court and in the courts below.

Key headnotes

Land & Property — Non-African Acquisition — Ministerial Consent under the Land Transfer Act

A lease of mailo land to a non-African executed without the Minister's consent required by section 2 of the Land Transfer Act is an illegal contract that is null and void ab initio.

Contract Law — Illegality — Void Contracts Incapable of Subsequent Validation

An illegal contract is void from its inception and nothing subsequently done, including the issue of a repossession certificate, can convert it into an enforceable contract.

Land & Property — Expropriated Properties Act — Repossession of Non-Existent Title

The Expropriated Properties Act 1982 can revive or confer rights only where a valid lease vested in the Government at the time of expropriation; a repossession certificate over a leasehold that never existed in law has no effect.

Illegality — Duty of Court to Decline Enforcement — Ex Turpi Causa in Civil Matters

Once an illegality is duly brought to the notice of the court it must refuse to enforce the transaction, even where the illegality is raised only in defence and not as the basis of a claim, and the maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio applies to civil as well as criminal matters.

Evidence — Proof of Statutory Consent — Conduct Cannot Create Non-Existent Rights

Statutory ministerial consent must be proved by cogent evidence on a balance of probabilities; the mere conduct of a party, such as accepting rent or effecting re-entry, cannot create, support or be treated as estoppel of a consent that was never given.

Legislation cited (8)

Land Transfer Act 1964 (Cap. 202) s.2
Expropriated Properties Act 1982 (Act 9 of 1982) s.1(2)(a)(b)
Expropriated Properties Act 1982 (Act 9 of 1982) s.14
Registration of Titles Act s.56
Registration of Titles Act s.184
Limitation Act s.6
Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance s.16
Rules of the Supreme Court r.3

Cases cited (9)

Noordin Charma Walji v Drake Ssemakula (Civil Appeal No. 40 of 1995)
Chris Akena Onapa v Mohammed Hussein Rashid Punjani (Civil Appeal No. 5 of 1995)
Motibhai Manji v Khursid Begum (1957) E.A. 101
Singh v Kulubya (1963) 3 All E.R. 499; (1963) E.A. 142
R v Mitha (1961) E.A. 568
Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All E.R. 372
Slaughter and May v Brown Doering McNab & Co [1892] 2 Q.B. 728
Phillios Vs Connine I935 l.K.B l5
Broadways Construction Co v Musa Kasule & 2 Others (EACA Civil Appeal No. 39 of 1977)

Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.