Ayano and Another v Angom (Civil Suit 118 of 2018)
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 court held that the purported will of the deceased was void for non-compliance with section 50 of the Succession Amendment Act and undue influence by the plaintiffs in its making. The deceased died intestate. The defendant lawfully obtained letters of administration following proper procedure before the Administrator General. The five daughters of the deceased are the rightful beneficiaries. The plaintiffs were found guilty of intermeddling with the estate. Plaintiffs' suit dismissed; defendant's counterclaim allowed.
Outcome
Plaintiffs' suit dismissed; defendant's counterclaim successful; permanent injunction issued restraining plaintiffs from intermeddling with the estate; declarations made that purported will was void, deceased died intestate, and defendant is lawful administrator; general and punitive damages awarded to defendant
Facts
Elel Obote Mike died on 16 December 2017. The first plaintiff claimed to be executrix of a will allegedly read at a family meeting on 24 December 2017. The defendant, a daughter of the deceased, obtained letters of administration on 24 April 2018. The plaintiffs challenged the letters, alleging the defendant obtained them fraudulently. The purported will dated 8 June 2017 was allegedly witnessed on 29 November 2017 by three witnesses in the office of the deceased's lawyer. The will contained numerous inconsistencies including incorrect dates of birth, incorrect identification of children, and inaccurate information about relationships. Evidence showed the first plaintiff was never legally married to the deceased. The attesting witness who testified stated he did not see the deceased sign the will and did not understand what he was signing. The second plaintiff was present when the will was allegedly signed and had prior knowledge of its contents despite it being confidential. At the funeral, approximately 90% of attendees rejected the will. The Administrator General's office held a family meeting on 22 January 2018 where beneficiaries unanimously agreed the deceased died intestate due to inconsistencies in the alleged will. The family consented to the defendant being granted letters of administration.
Issues
- Whether the late Elel Mike Obote left a valid will and if so, whether he died testate.
- Whether the Defendant lawfully acquired letters of administration for the estate of the late Mike Elel Obote.
- Who are the rightful beneficiaries of the Estate of the Late Elel Mike Obote.
- Which Party is guilty of intermeddling with the estate of the late Mike Elel Obote.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- The Plaintiffs' suit is hereby dismissed.
- The Counterclaimant/Defendant's counterclaim is hereby successful.
- A permanent injunction is hereby issued restraining the Plaintiffs, their agents, servants or anyone deriving authority from them from continuing to intermeddle with the estate of the late Elel Mike Obote.
- A declaration that the Will left by the late Elel Mike Obote was void and therefore the late Elel Mike Obote died intestate.
- A declaration that the Defendant is the lawful and only appointed administrator of the estate of the late Elel Mike Obote.
- A declaration that the 1st Plaintiff is not a widow nor a beneficiary under the estate of the late Elel Mike Obote.
- The Defendant is hereby ordered to file an inventory in this court within 6 (six) months from the date of delivery of this Judgment.
- General damages of UGX 10,000,000/= are awarded to the Defendant/counterclaimant as Administrator of the Estate of the Late Elel Mike Obote. The 2nd Plaintiff will not derive any benefit from this.
- The Plaintiffs are ordered to pay punitive damages of UGX 5,000,000/= to the Defendant/Counterclaimant as Administrator of the Estate of the late Elel Mike Obote for intermeddling in the estate. The 2nd Plaintiff will not derive any benefit from this.
- Costs be payable by the Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Succession Amendment Act s.50(1)
- Succession Amendment Act s.50(2)
- Succession Amendment Act s.47
- Succession Amendment Act s.234(2)(a)
- Succession Amendment Act s.27(1)(b)
- Succession Amendment Act s.268
- Administrator General's Act s.1(f)
- Evidence Act s.101
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 13
Cases cited (6)
- Beatrice Asire Malinga v Jonathan Malinga (High Court Civil Suit No. 13 of 2013)
- Estate of James Ngengi Muigai (deceased), Nairobi High Court Succession Cause No. 523/1996
- Fredrick Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
- Kampala District Land Board and Another v Venansio Babweyana (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2007)
- Francis Babumba v Erusa Bunju [1988-1990] HCB 179
- Luzinda Marion Babirye v Ssekamatte and Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 366 of 2016)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.