Kakembo v Naddaba and Another (Miscellaneous Application 1030 of 2022)

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.

Holding

A consent judgment may be set aside where it was actuated by illegality, fraud, mistake, or contravention of court policy. Where a consent judgment affects the property rights of third parties who were not heard, the court may set it aside to protect their constitutional right to a fair hearing under Articles 28 and 44 of the Constitution. The applicants, as administrators of an estate claiming ownership of the disputed land, were entitled to be heard before their interests were compromised by a consent settlement between other parties.

Outcome

Consent judgment set aside; matter may proceed to full hearing on merits

Facts

Moses Kakembo, Joyce Naddaba, and Ernest Sensarire Ssemakadde, claiming to be administrators of estates with interests in land comprised in Busiro Block 489 Plot 137, sought to review and set aside a consent judgment entered on 16 September 2021 between Ssekyanzi Fred and Mutebi Grace in Civil Suit No. 207 of 2021. The consent judgment purported to settle ownership of the land in favour of the estate of the late Blasio Ndaka. The applicants alleged they had not been heard before the consent judgment was entered, and that it fraudulently compromised their interests in the suit land. Ssekyanzi Fred opposed, asserting that the registered proprietor was Kiyimba Fred as administrator of Blasio Ndaka's estate, and that the applicants had no valid claim. Default judgment was entered against the second respondent, Mutebi Grace, who did not respond despite substituted service.

Issues

1. Whether the application has merits for review and setting aside of the consent judgment.
2. What are the available remedies to the parties.

Orders

• The application is allowed.
• The consent settlement and decree in Civil Suit No. 207 of 2021 Ssekyazi Fred versus Mutebi Grace is hereby set aside.
• Each party shall bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (15)

• Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 s.82
• Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 s.98
• Judicature Act Cap. 13 s.33
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 46 Rule 1
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 46 Rule 2
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 46 Rule 8
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rule 1
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rule 2
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rule 3
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 25 Rule 6
• Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.101
• Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.102
• Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.103
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 28
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 44

Cases cited (8)

• Betuco (U) Ltd and Another v Barclays Bank and Others (HCMA No. 243 of 2009)
• Ismail Sunderji Hirani v Noorali Esmail Kassam [1952] EA 131
• Attorney General and Uganda Land Commission v James Mark Kamoga and James Kamala (SCCA No. 8 of 2004)
• Seton on Judgements and Orders, 7th Edition, Vol. 1, page 124
• Brooke Bond Liebig (T) Ltd v Mallya (1975) EA 266
• Mohamed Allibhai v W.E. Bukenya and Another (SCCA No. 56 of 1996)
• FX Mubuuke v UEB (Miscellaneous Application No. 98 of 2005)
• Re Nakivubo Chemists (U) Ltd (1979) HCB 12

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