Wakilii

Buwule v Sterling International Civil Engineering Uganda Ltd (Civil Suit No. 909 of 1993)

High Court · [1996] UGHC 69 · 1996 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass and damages
Decision
Judgment for the Plaintiff with damages 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

Held that the defendant trespassed on the plaintiff's registered land by excavating murram without permission. Although the defendant claimed to have dealt with a customary tenant on the land, a tenant at sufferance cannot lawfully authorise permanent injury to land whose reversionary interest vests in the registered proprietor. The appropriate measure of damages for unlawful excavation is not the market value of the material extracted, but the loss of amenities and consequential damage to the land. General damages of UGX 30,000,000 awarded.

Outcome

Judgment for the Plaintiff with damages and costs

Facts

The plaintiff, a registered proprietor of Block 237, Plot 222, Mutungo, sued the defendant for trespassing on his land and excavating murram worth UGX 330,000,000, leaving the land extensively damaged over 5 acres. The defendant denied the claim, asserting it had paid a customary tenant (DW2) for excavation rights and offered UGX 387,600 as compensation. Between 1991 and 1994, the defendant excavated murram from the plaintiff's land without his permission despite his protestations. The defendant's advocates later admitted liability in a letter and proposed settlement. The area affected was confirmed by multiple witnesses as 5 acres with pits up to 38 feet deep. The defendant had contracted with Kampala City Council to build roads in the Industrial Area and sourced murram from Mutungo. The plaintiff's expert valuer assessed 18,100 cubic metres of murram had been removed. The defendant argued it dealt with DW2, who claimed to be a kibanja holder paying busulu to the Kabaka of Buganda, and that the excavation site was only 150' x 80'.

Issues

  1. Whether the murram in issue was extracted from the Plaintiff's land?
  2. Whether the extraction of murram from the Plaintiff's land amounted to trespass?
  3. What are the appropriate remedies in this case?

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendant.
  • General damages awarded to the Plaintiff in the sum of UGS 30,000,000 (UGS 5,000,000 for trespass and UGS 25,000,000 for damage to land).
  • Interest awarded at court rate from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Land & Property — Trespass to Land — Elements — Proof of Possession
Where physical possession is not proved, proof of ownership is prima facie proof of possession unless there is evidence that another person is in possession of the land.
Land & Property — Customary Tenure — Tenant at Sufferance — Authority to Grant Rights
A customary tenant at sufferance under the Land Reform Decree cannot lawfully authorise the excavation of murram or other material which would permanently injure land in which the reversionary interest is vested in the registered proprietor.
Tort Law — Trespass to Land — Elements — Unjustifiable Interference
Trespass to land is established when the plaintiff proves possession of the land and that the defendant unjustifiably interfered with that possession. Excavation without the owner's permission or authority constitutes unjustifiable interference.
Evidence — Expert Evidence — Scientific Basis Required
Any expert witness must provide a scientific base for his opinion before his findings can be accepted by court. Expert conclusions based on hearsay without scientific methodology remain suspect.
Damages & Quantum — Special Damages — Measure of Damages for Unlawful Excavation
The measure of special damages for unlawfully excavated material is not the market value of the material extracted, but rather the rental value the owner would have received if the area had been leased for quarrying, or the profit the owner expected to make if intending to quarry himself, or the value of amenities lost and consequential damage if not intending to quarry.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Trespass and Property Damage — Assessment
Where land has been extensively damaged by excavation but is not a write-off and may still be developed or sold, and where the trespass was deliberate or reckless, general damages may be awarded for both the trespass itself and the consequential damage to the land, measured by loss of amenities and consequential harm rather than the value of material taken.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Land Reform Decree (Decree 3 of 1975) s.3

Cases cited (5)

  • Musisi Dirisa and 3 Others v Siedco (U) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1993)
  • Estate of Shamji Visram and Nurji Karsan v Shantiprasad Jaganlal Bhatt and Others (Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1964)
  • Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort 9th Edition Page 309
  • Clerk and Lindsell on Tort (15th Edition Pages 1100-1101)
  • Clerk & Lindsell on Torts 15th Edition Page 1105

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Buwule v Sterling International Civil Engineering Uganda Ltd (Civil Suit No. 909 of 1993) [1996] UGHC 69 (16 August 1996)
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.