Wakilii

Kamuntu Investment Limited and Another v Dr. Narcis Kabatereine T/A Kigezi Iron Ore Miners Association and Others (Civil Suit 10 of 2023)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 354 · 2025 Preliminary Objection Upheld — Suit Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection to plaint on ground that it discloses no reasonable cause of action
Decision
Suit struck out for disclosing no cause of action

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

The court held that the plaint disclosed no cause of action because the plaintiffs' location and exploration licenses had expired before the suit was filed. Regulation 76 of the Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023, which permits continuation of operations pending renewal, applies only to beneficiation operations, not to location and exploration licenses. The suit was struck out under Order 6 Rule 30 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Outcome

Suit struck out for disclosing no cause of action

Facts

The plaintiffs held location and exploration licenses for iron ore mining granted on 2 July 2020, which expired after two years on 2 July 2022. The plaintiffs filed suit on 7 December 2023 seeking orders that the defendants had breached their constitutional, statutory and common law rights to exclusively conduct exploration, mining and prospecting operations. The plaintiffs claimed they had applied for renewal of the licenses in 2021 and argued that under Regulation 76 of the Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023, they could continue operations pending renewal. The defendants raised a preliminary objection that the plaint disclosed no cause of action because the licenses had expired.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaint discloses a reasonable cause of action where the plaintiffs' mining licenses had expired before the suit was filed.
  2. Whether Regulation 76 of the Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023 permits continuation of exploration and location operations pending renewal of expired licenses.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection sustained.
  • Suit struck out under Order 6 Rule 30 of the Civil Procedure Rules for disclosing no cause of action.
  • Costs awarded to the defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Striking Out Pleadings — Test for Cause of Action
A plaint discloses a cause of action if three elements are present: the plaintiff enjoyed a right, the right has been violated, and the defendant is liable. If any element is missing, no cause of action is established and no amendment will be allowed.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Determination of Cause of Action — Perusal of Plaint
The question of whether a plaint discloses a cause of action is determined upon perusal of the plaint and the attachments thereto with an assumption that the facts pleaded or implied therein are true.
Administrative Law — Mining Licenses — Continuation of Operations Pending Renewal — Scope of Regulation 76
Regulation 76 of the Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023 permits continuation of operations pending renewal only for beneficiation operations. There is no corresponding provision for extension of location and exploration licenses, and such extension cannot be presumed but must be expressly provided for by the regulations.
Statutory Interpretation — Mining Regulations — Beneficiation Operations Distinguished from Exploration
Beneficiation in the context of mining and materials processing refers to the process of treating ore materials to improve their quality and make them more suitable for further processing or use, often by separating valuable components from waste material. It is distinct from exploration and location operations.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 Rule 30(1)
  • Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023 Regulation 53(5)
  • Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023 Regulation 76
  • Mining and Mineral (Licensing) Regulations 2023 Regulation 113

Cases cited (2)

  • Auto Garage and Others v Motokov [1971] EA 514
  • Attorney General v Olouch (1972) EA 392

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kamuntu Investment Limited and Another v Dr. Narcis Kabatereine T_A Kigezi Iron Ore Miners Association and Others (Civil Suit 10 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 354 (10 April 2025)
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.