Byaruhanga Samuel v Gumisiriza Joseph (Civil Appeal 44 of 2019)
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 a son entering family land where his mother resides does not commit trespass as he has an interest as a family member. The court found that the disputed house was built by the respondent's mother, not the respondent, and that the appellant authorised use of building materials. The appellant failed to prove trespass, nuisance, or conversion. Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to the Respondent
Facts
The appellant father sued his son (respondent) in the Chief Magistrate's Court claiming the respondent trespassed on family land by building a three-roomed house without permission using the appellant's bricks and sand, and that the respondent's tenants created a nuisance. The respondent denied building the house, stating his mother (the appellant's wife) built it. The trial court dismissed the suit, finding the mother built the house. The appellant appealed to the High Court. Evidence showed the respondent had lived on the family land since 1997, the mother testified she built the house with a loan from her business income, and the appellant had authorised use of the building materials.
Issues
- Whether the Respondent trespassed on the suit land.
- Whether the Respondent committed the tort of nuisance on the suit land.
- Whether the Respondent committed the tort of conversion of the Appellant's building materials.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (5)
- Rwabugande Moses v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2014)
- Baguma Fred v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2004)
- Justine E.M.N Lutaya v Sterling Civil Engineering Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
- Sheik Muhammed Lubowa v Kitara Enterprises Ltd (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1988)
- Hunter v Canary Wharf [1998] 1 WLR 434
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.