Carolyn Bwiza v Florence Nakiwala & Anor (Civil Suit No. 196 of 2010)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

A caveat that does not describe or indicate which part of titled land is being claimed is defective and must be struck out. A caveator has no right to enter a caveat against property in which no interest is claimed. Where a caveat prohibits dealings with the entire title but the caveator's interest extends only to part of the land, the caveat is fundamentally defective. The court ordered removal of the caveats to permit the plaintiff to survey and transfer her portions, with reinstatement thereafter to protect the defendant's interest in the residual land.

Outcome

Caveats ordered removed to enable plaintiff to survey and transfer her portions of land; caveats to be reinstated thereafter to protect 1st defendant's interest in residual land on the same titles

Facts

The plaintiff purchased 0.65 acres of land from Kyadondo Block 228 Plots 568 and 569 and 0.33 acres from Plot 464 at Mbalwa on 3 August 2009 from Protasio Ayigihugu, who had himself purchased the land in 1984 and occupied it for 25 years. The plaintiff took possession immediately. The registered proprietors executed transfer forms in the plaintiff's favour. When the plaintiff sought to survey the land, she discovered that the 1st defendant had lodged caveats on the entire titles on 25 August 2009. The 1st defendant, daughter of the late George William Lule, occupied a different portion of the same titles (0.849 acres of plots 568 and 569 and 0.36 acres of plot 464) across the road from the plaintiff's portions. The two portions were on the same titles but separated by a road. The defendants did not file defences and the plaintiff proceeded exparte on formal proof.

Issues

1. Whether the 1st defendant had a right to lodge the caveats complained of on to the Certificate of Title of the suit land.
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies prayed for in the plaint.

Orders

• Suit allowed in part.
• Removal of caveats registered as instruments No. Kla 427380 lodged on the titles of land comprised in Kyadondo Block 228 plots 568 and 569 and Kyadondo Block 228 plot 464 at Mbalwa granted.
• The 2nd defendant is ordered to remove the 1st defendant's caveats lodged on the Certificates of title comprised in Block 228 plots 568 and 569 and Block 228 plot 464 at Mbalwa to enable the plaintiff to have the suit lands surveyed and transferred into her names.
• The 2nd defendant is further ordered to reinstate the said caveats after the plaintiff has surveyed off her said portions of land and transferred them into her names so as to protect the 1st defendant's interest in the residual land on the said certificates of title.
• The plaintiff shall meet her own costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Registration of Titles Act Cap. 230

Cases cited (1)

• Boyes v Gathure (1969) EA 385

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Nakiwala v Bwiza (Ma No. 77 of 2012)

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