Wakilii

Attorney General v Tandeka (Miscellaneous Application 25 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 930 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to deposit compensation in court and for eviction orders under the Land Acquisition Act for land required for the EACOP project
Decision
Compensation deposited in court; vacant possession and eviction orders granted to enable the EACOP project to proceed; Respondents may later collect compensation or challenge valuation under Section 13 of the Land Acquisition Act

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

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.

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 High Court granted the Attorney General leave to deposit compensation of UGX 182,019,743 in court for land compulsorily acquired for the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline project. The court held that where respondents refuse compensation, lack legal representatives, or are untraceable, Section 6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act permits deposit in court to discharge government obligations while allowing the project to proceed. The court granted vacant possession and eviction orders but required compliance with the law and without endangering human life.

Outcome

Compensation deposited in court; vacant possession and eviction orders granted to enable the EACOP project to proceed; Respondents may later collect compensation or challenge valuation under Section 13 of the Land Acquisition Act

Facts

The Attorney General sought to acquire approximately 14.996 acres in Kabayoola village, Sembabule District for the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project pursuant to Statutory Instrument No. 105 of 2019. The Chief Government Valuer assessed compensation at UGX 182,019,743. Since 2022, government was unable to compensate the nine respondents due to: refusal by some to accept compensation, unresolved land ownership disputes, lack of legally recognized estate representatives, and inability to locate certain respondents. The 5th Respondent raised concerns about non-existent plots being valued and his registered land being omitted from valuation. The 7th Respondent claimed the Administrator General refused to issue Letters of Administration, preventing him from receiving compensation. The 9th Respondent claimed he was directed to halt house construction and incurred rental costs of UGX 300,000 monthly for 48 months. The Assessment Officer was appointed in November 2023 and gazetted a Notice of Intention to take possession in January 2024.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to deposit the Respondents' compensation sum in court under Section 6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application granted.
  • Applicant granted leave to deposit UGX 182,019,743 (Uganda Shillings One Hundred Eighty-Two Million Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred Forty-Three) in court as compensation for land in Kabayoola village, Sembabule District.
  • Compensation sum to be deposited on the account of the Registrar High Court, Account Number: 003010088000012 Bank of Uganda.
  • Applicant granted vacant possession of the land to conduct its activities thereon.
  • Applicant granted eviction and demolition orders against the Respondents but must do so without endangering human life and in accordance with the law.
  • Applicant discharged from any liabilities arising out of any claim and/or action following this order.
  • No orders as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Law — Compulsory Land Acquisition — Right to Property — Requirements under Article 26
The right to property is a fundamental constitutional right that cannot be compulsorily deprived except where the acquisition is necessary for public use and the law provides for prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation prior to taking possession, together with a right of access to court by any person with an interest in the property.
Land & Property — Land Acquisition — Deposit of Compensation in Court — Circumstances under Section 6(5)
Under Section 6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act, where a person awarded compensation refuses to accept payment, or any circumstances arise rendering payment inexpedient, difficult or impossible, the High Court may on application by the Attorney General order payment into court on such conditions as it thinks appropriate.
Land & Property — Land Acquisition — Unresolved Disputes — Procedure for Deposit in Court
Refusal to accept compensation, absence of legal representatives, and inability to locate certain respondents justify depositing the compensation sum in court to legally discharge government obligations while enabling government to take possession of land and proceed with a public project.
Administrative Law — Public Projects — Balancing Public Interest and Individual Rights
Courts are required to apply Article 26 of the Constitution bearing in mind that disputes among respondents or challenges to assessed awards should not cause delays in public works or become impediments to the public interest and the implementation of projects.
Land & Property — Land Acquisition — Remedy for Dissatisfied Parties — Right to Challenge Valuation
Parties dissatisfied with awarded compensation or contesting valuation may institute legal proceedings by way of objection or other action to the High Court under Section 13 of the Land Acquisition Act after compensation has been deposited in court.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (3)

  • Advocates for Natural Resources Governance and Development & 2 Others v Attorney General & Another (Constitutional Petition No. 40 of 2013)
  • Attorney General v Etot Paul Peter & Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 144 of 2018)
  • Attorney General v Kisembo Rugadya & 41 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Attorney General v Tandeka (Miscellaneous Application 25 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 930 (1 October 2024)
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.