Wakilii

Jaffer Abdullah v Nswali & 5 Ors (Misc. Application No. 316 of 2014)

High Court · [2015] UGHCCD 160 · 2015 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to be added as a respondent in existing judicial review proceedings
Decision
Applicant added as respondent in the judicial review proceedings

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 person claiming registered proprietorship of land that is the subject of judicial review proceedings challenging the Custodian Board's allocation decisions is a proper person to be heard. The applicant's proprietary interest makes him an interested party entitled to participate under the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009. Application allowed; applicant added as respondent.

Outcome

Applicant added as respondent in the judicial review proceedings

Facts

The applicant claimed to be the registered proprietor of land purchased from Muhammed Mitha and Sons in 2006. The Departed Asians Property Custodian Board, without his consent, allocated the land on a temporary basis to five individuals (the 1st to 5th respondents). When the applicant raised objections, the Board cancelled those allocations. The five individuals then filed judicial review proceedings challenging the cancellation of their temporary allocations but did not join the applicant as a party. The applicant could not take possession of his property due to the ongoing proceedings and sought to be added as a respondent in the judicial review case.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be added as a respondent in judicial review proceedings concerning land to which he claims registered proprietorship.
  2. Whether an individual claiming proprietary interest in land subject to judicial review has locus standi to be heard in the proceedings.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Each party to bear their own costs.
  • Applicants to file their affidavit not later than 8 October 2015.
  • Respondents to file affidavit not later than 18 October 2015.
  • Submissions by all parties by 10 November 2015.
  • Matter to be mentioned on 10 November 2015 and a date for ruling set down.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Application to Be Added as Party in Existing Proceedings
A person claiming registered proprietary interest in land that forms the subject matter of judicial review proceedings is entitled to be added as a party to enable the court to resolve all issues concerning the application.
Judicial Review — Interested Parties — Right to Be Heard — Locus Standi
Under the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009, any person who desires to be heard and appears to be a proper person to be heard shall be heard, notwithstanding that they have not been served with the notice of motion or summons, where they hold a proprietary interest in the subject matter of the review.
Judicial Review — Service — Persons Affected by Application
Service must be effected on all persons affected by a judicial review application, and a person holding title to property that is the subject of the review cannot be excluded from the proceedings on the ground that judicial review is directed only at public officers.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (2)

  • United Reflexologists of Uganda Vrs. Hon. Stephen Malinga & Attorney General
  • Kalemera v Unilever Ltd (HCCS No. 1181 of 1987)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Jaffer Abdullah Vs Nswali & 5 Ors (Misc. Application No. 316 of 2014) [2015] UGHCCD 160 (28 September 2015)
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.