A. Dean & Company Ltd v Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) (Civil Appeal No. 153 of 2015)

Observed later treatment

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant, as a registered proprietor and transferee of the leasehold under sections 59 and 92(2) of the Registration of Titles Act, was not a stranger to the lease. As a public body, KCCA was bound by Articles 28, 42 and 44 of the Constitution to accord the appellant a fair hearing before terminating or declining to extend the lease. Its decision was amenable to judicial review, which concerns the decision-making process rather than the merits. The trial Judge erred in treating the matter as a purely contractual dispute and in evaluating the merits. Certiorari, mandamus and an injunction were granted.

Outcome

Appeal allowed; High Court ruling set aside; certiorari, mandamus and injunction granted; respondent ordered to give the appellant a fair hearing before deciding on lease renewal

Facts

KCCA (successor to Kampala City Council) was registered freehold proprietor of land on Plot 52 Port Bell Road, Kiswa, Nakawa. In 2008 KCC leased the land to Nzaire for an initial five-year term extendable to 49 years subject to development of a hostel and apartments. In 2011 the Kampala District Land Board consented to transfer, and Nzaire transferred the lease to the appellant, who was registered as proprietor in March 2012. The appellant submitted building plans and applied for extension of the lease. KCCA declined the extension, stating the Land Board was the controlling authority, and left the building plans unaddressed. In February 2014 KCCA's Contracts Committee terminated the lease for failure to fulfil development obligations and expiry of the conditional period. The appellant sought judicial review in the High Court, which dismissed the application as a contractual matter to be pursued by ordinary suit. The appellant appealed.

Issues

1. Whether the appellant, as registered proprietor of the leasehold suit land, was entitled to a fair hearing before the respondent decided not to extend or to terminate the lease.
2. Whether the appellant, as transferee and registered proprietor in possession with the respondent's knowledge, was entitled to apply for judicial review of the respondent's decision.
3. Whether the trial Judge properly evaluated the evidence in concluding that the appellant was a stranger to the lease.

Orders

• The appeal is allowed.
• The ruling of the High Court is set aside.
• An order of certiorari to quash the decision of the Respondent not to extend the Appellant's lease on land comprised in Plot 52 Port Bell Road is granted.
• An order of mandamus is issued compelling the Respondent to give the Appellant a fair hearing before a decision can be made on whether to renew the lease or not.
• An order of injunction to restrain the Respondent from leasing the suit land to any person until after giving the Appellant a fair hearing.
• The Respondent shall pay the Appellant the costs of this Appeal and the costs of the proceedings in the High Court.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.59
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.92(2)
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 28
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 28(1)
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 42
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 44
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 274
• Court of Appeal Rules rule 30

Cases cited (12)

• Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
• Pandya v R. (1957) E.A. 336
• Okeno v Republic (1972) E.A. 32
• Charles B. Bitwire v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1985)
• Uganda Taxi Operators and Drivers Association v Kampala Capital City Authority and the Executive Director Misc. Application 137 of 2011
• Francis Butagira v Deborah Namukasa (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1989)
• Paul Kamga v Kampala District Land Board and Another (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2013)
• Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1984] UKHL 9
• Balondemu David v The Law Development Centre (Miscellaneous Cause No. 61 of 2016)
• John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 353 of 2005)
• DOTT Services Ltd v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 125 of 2009)
• Commissioner of Land v Kunste Hotel Ltd [1995-1998] 1 EA

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Continental Air Solutions and Another v Commissioner for Land Registration and 6 Others (Miscellaneous Application 76 of 2020)

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.