Wakilii

Combined Properties Ltd v Secretary to Treasury & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 1028 of 2016)

High Court · [2016] UGHCEBD 30 · 2016 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for mandamus arising from unsatisfied judgment in HCCS 246 of 1998
Decision
Application for mandamus dismissed due to doubtful claim and procedural irregularities

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

Application for mandamus to compel payment of judgment debt dismissed. The court found the claim doubtful due to multiple procedural irregularities: certificates of order against government and taxation were not shown to have been served on respondents; the amended motion appeared to have been served before it was filed; and the application sought orders (damages at 10%, interest at 25%, costs at 5%) not granted in the underlying judgment.

Outcome

Application for mandamus dismissed due to doubtful claim and procedural irregularities

Facts

Combined Properties Ltd obtained judgment in HCCS 246/1998 on 29 January 2015 against H.P. Gant, Hima Cement and Uganda Land Commission for payment of land value assessed at UGX 8,325,000,000 plus interest and costs of UGX 104,954,250. Applicant sent copies of decree and valuation to Secretary to Treasury and Attorney General in April and November 2015. A certificate of order against government was issued on 23 May 2016. The applicant filed this application seeking mandamus to compel payment, claiming the debt had been owing since 1998. The application was heard ex parte initially, then amended to add Attorney General as a party.

Issues

  1. Whether this is a proper case for issue of a writ of mandamus

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Mandamus — Requirements for Issue of Writ
To obtain a writ of mandamus, an applicant must establish: (1) a clear legal right and corresponding duty in the respondent; (2) that some specific act required by law has been omitted by the officer; (3) lack of any alternative remedy; or (4) that an alternative remedy exists but is inconvenient, less beneficial, less effective or totally ineffective.
Mandamus — Clear and Undisputed Right Required
Mandamus will not issue to enforce doubtful rights. The duty to perform an act must be undisputable and plainly defined.
Execution — Service of Certificates Against Government
Where there is no proof that a certificate of order against government and certificate of taxation were served on the respondent government entities, the court will find the claim doubtful and decline to issue mandamus to compel payment.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (3)

  • Shah v Attorney General [1970] EALR 43
  • Kyoniya and Another v Attorney General & Another (CMA 57 of 2012) [2012] ULR 239
  • Nampogo Robert and Another v Attorney General (HCCV MC No. 0048 of 2009)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Combined Properties Ltd v Secretary to Treasury & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 1028 of 2016) [2016] UGHCEBD 30 (6 December 2016)
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.