Wakilii

Bahimbiriza Bidindwale v Total Energies E P Uganda B V (Civil Suit 36 of 2022)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 1145 · 2024 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for enforcement of memorandum of understanding regarding land compensation payment
Decision
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff with compensatory payment, general damages, interest and costs

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 held that where parties entered into a memorandum of understanding providing that compensation for surveyed land measuring 16.461 acres would be paid to the successful party following final determination of a land ownership dispute, the successful party is entitled to the full agreed compensation sum even though the court decree specified only 9 acres. The defendant cannot strike a new bargain allocating part of the compensation to the unsuccessful party merely because the surveyed acreage exceeded the originally estimated acreage in the pleadings. The plaintiff was awarded the full contractual sum plus general damages and commercial interest.

Outcome

Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff with compensatory payment, general damages, interest and costs

Facts

The plaintiff owned customary land in Buliisa District which was acquired by the defendant for the Tilenga Oil Project. A dispute arose with Ochaya Mugayo Lovis over approximately 2 acres, litigated in Civil Suit No. 02 of 2015. The defendant surveyed the disputed land and found it to be 16.461 acres (not the plaintiff's estimated 9 acres). The parties and defendant entered into a memorandum of understanding dated 21 November 2018 providing that upon final determination of the pending appeal (HCCA No. 52 of 2016), compensation of Ugx 74,620,000/= would be paid to the successful party. On 26 November 2021, the appeal was dismissed and judgment entered for the plaintiff. The defendant refused to pay the full sum, offering only Ugx 40,950,000/= (pro-rated for 9 acres) and proposing to pay the balance to Ochaya Mugayo. The plaintiff brought this suit to enforce the memorandum of understanding.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the Ugx 74,620,000/= from the Defendant.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The defendant to pay the plaintiff the compensatory sum of Ugx 74,620,000/=.
  • General damages of Ugx 25,000,000/=.
  • Interest on the sum of Ugx 74,620,000/= at 24% per annum from 26/11/2021 till payment in full.
  • Interest on general damages at 18% per annum from the date of judgment till payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Interpretation of Memorandum of Understanding — Land Compensation Agreements
Where parties to a land dispute enter into a memorandum of understanding with a third party acquiring the land, agreeing that a specified compensation sum for surveyed land will be paid to the successful party upon final court determination of ownership, the successful party is entitled to the full contractual sum regardless of discrepancies between the surveyed acreage and the acreage specified in the court decree.
Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Unilateral Variation
A party to a memorandum of understanding cannot strike a new bargain with a third party and allocate contracted funds to an unsuccessful litigant, thereby disregarding the express terms of the original agreement providing for payment to the successful party.
Land & Property — Customary Land — Survey and Acreage Determination
Where unregistered customary land is surveyed and found to exceed the acreage estimated in pleadings, an unsuccessful party to the original dispute cannot claim entitlement to the excess acreage merely because the surveyed measurement differs from the original pleaded estimate.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Deprivation of Compensation Funds
General damages are appropriate where a plaintiff has been unlawfully deprived of compensation funds for land acquired for a major infrastructure project, causing stress, mental trauma and inconvenience due to uncertainty regarding payment.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Commercial Rate on Compensation Arrears
In a matter of a commercial nature involving land compensation, interest at 24% per annum is appropriate on the decretal sum from the date of final judgment determining ownership, and interest at 18% per annum is appropriate on general damages from the date of judgment.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (7)

  • Saladin Media Advertising T/A OMD (U) v Pioneer Easy Bus Ltd (HCCS No. 435 of 2012)
  • Nipun N. Bhatia v Crane Bank Ltd (CACA No. 75 of 2006)
  • James Fredrick Nsubuga v Attorney General (HCCS No. 13 of 1993)
  • S & A Consultants Ltd v Crane Management Services Ltd (HCCS No. 352 of 2013)
  • Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129
  • URA v Stephen Mabosi (SCCA No. 1 of 1996)
  • Roko Construction v Attorney General (HCCS No. 517 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Bahimbiriza Bidindwale v Total Energies E P Uganda B V (Civil Suit 36 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 1145 (13 December 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.