Wakilii

Byamukama v Kabonesa (HC CV CA No. 0070 of 2008)

High Court · [2012] UGHC 277 · 2012 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Magistrate Grade 1 Court judgment on land ownership dispute
Decision
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Magistrate Grade 1 Court upholding Respondent's ownership of land affirmed

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 an appeal is not a retrial and the court will not re-evaluate evidence not pleaded in the Memorandum of Appeal. The Appellant failed to demonstrate any error of law or fact by the trial Magistrate in his evaluation of evidence. The appeal was dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Magistrate Grade 1 Court upholding Respondent's ownership of land affirmed

Facts

The Appellant appealed against the judgment of the Magistrate Grade 1, Kamwenge, delivered on 4 December 2008, which decreed that disputed land belonged to the Respondent. The Appellant filed two grounds of appeal: that the trial Magistrate erred in decreeing the land belonged to the Respondent, and that the Magistrate erred in ordering the Appellant to pay costs. At the hearing, both parties were represented and requested to file written submissions. The Appellant subsequently abandoned the second ground concerning costs.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned trial Magistrate erred in law and fact when he decreed that the land belonged to the Respondent.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Judgment and orders of the lower court upheld.
  • Costs to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Appeals — Scope of Appellate Review — Evaluation of Evidence
An appeal is not a retrial and the appellate court will not re-evaluate evidence that is not pleaded in the Memorandum of Appeal. The court is guided by the Memorandum of Appeal in determining the scope of the appeal.
Appeals — Grounds of Appeal — Burden on Appellant
Where an Appellant grounds an appeal on alleged errors of law or fact by the trial court, the Appellant must demonstrate in submissions what specific error was committed. Failure to identify any specific error of law or fact, and instead merely seeking re-evaluation of evidence, provides no basis for appellate intervention.
Costs — Costs Follow the Event
Costs follow the event. Where a party succeeds in defending an appeal, they are entitled to costs pursuant to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Legislation cited (1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Byamukama v Kabonesa (HC CV CA No. 0070 of 2008) [2012] UGHC 277 (7 December 2012)
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.