Ereu Vincent and Others v Adebo Regina (Civil Appeal No. 76 of 2023)
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.
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
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial court's finding that the respondent had received two gardens of customary land as a valid gift intervivos from Echobu Zedekiya. The court held that customary law requires no writing for transfer of land by gift, and that the gift was perfected by the donor's intention, delivery, and the donee's acceptance and exclusive possession during the donor's lifetime. The appellants failed to discharge the evidential burden of proving that the gifted land formed part of the estate over which the third appellant had inheritance rights.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; trial court judgment and orders upheld and to be enforced
Facts
The respondent married the third appellant in 1965 and they had ten children. In 1966, the third appellant married a second wife with whom he had six children. The third appellant had no land from his father but stayed with his uncle Yokoyasi Egwanyu. Upon marriage, the respondent was given two gardens of land by Echobu Zedekiya, the third appellant's elder brother. Around 1970, Yokoyasi Egwanyu gave the respondent six additional gardens. The respondent cultivated the two gardens given by Echobu Zedekiya during his lifetime. The first and second appellants, sons of the third appellant by his second wife, encroached on the two gardens under the authority of their father. The respondent sued for trespass, vacant possession, and a permanent injunction. The trial court found in favour of the respondent. The appellants appealed, claiming the land belonged to the third appellant by inheritance from his uncles Edoku Edward and Yokoyasi Egwanyu.
Issues
- Whether the learned trial Magistrate erred in law and fact when he held that the suit land was gifted to the respondent.
- Whether the learned trial Magistrate erred in law and fact when he failed to evaluate the evidence on record.
- Whether the decision of the learned trial Magistrate occasioned a miscarriage of justice upon the appellants.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Judgment, decree and orders of the trial Magistrate upheld and to be enforced.
- Costs of the appeal and of the proceedings in the lower court to be paid by the appellants.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (12)
- Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (SC Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
- Fredrick Zabwe v Orient Bank Ltd (SCCA No. 4 of 2006)
- Baguma Fred v Uganda (SC Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2004)
- Nassozi and Another v Kalule (Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2012)
- Wayiatilio and Another v Elvira Ojali (Civil Appeal No. 23 of 2009)
- Olweny Alfred v Otema (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 2019)
- Bahema Patrick and Another v Uganda (SCCA No. 1 of 1999)
- Oyet Bosco and Another v Abwola Vincent (Civil Appeal No. 68 of 2016)
- Paul Kathuni Gichunge v Polycarp Ntwiga & 2 Others [2016] eKLR
- Norah Nassozi and Another v George William Kalule (Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2012)
- Ronchobhai Shivabhai Patel Ltd v Henry Wambuga and Another (SCCA No. 6 of 2017)
- Attorney General v Florence Baliraine (Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2003)
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.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.