Wakilii

Kasande v The Administrator General & Another (Civil Suit 965 of 1990)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 55 · 1992 Judgment for Plaintiff (Damages Awarded) AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for damages arising from unlawful eviction, conversion, and distress
Decision
Plaintiff awarded damages and interest but costs awarded against plaintiff

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 plaintiff was in arrears of rent for January to March 1990, totalling UGX 15,000. The eviction and distress were lawful under section 102(b) of the Registration of Titles Act because rent was unpaid for over 30 days. The defendants failed to return all seized property. The plaintiff was awarded nominal damages of UGX 900,000 for missing properties, UGX 100,000 in general damages for non-use, and UGX 440 in special damages for cash not returned. Costs were awarded to the defendants.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded damages and interest but costs awarded against plaintiff

Facts

Marion Kasande, a tenant on Plot 76 Mityana Road, rented premises from the Administrator General managing the estate of the late Samuel Kisiriza. She paid rent regularly from 1979 through Balam Semajwali and then to the Administrator General from 1988. In 1990, after letters of administration were granted to the Administrator General, tenants were served notice to vacate by 28 February 1990 and pay arrears. On 30 March 1990, the Administrator General instructed a court bailiff, James Ngobi, to evict the plaintiff. Her shop goods and personal property were seized and taken to Kampala. Some property was later returned, but the plaintiff claimed items were missing or damaged. She had been paying UGX 60,000 per annum in six-month instalments. She had not paid rent for January, February, or March 1990 at the time of eviction.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff was in arrears of rent and if so how much.
  2. Whether the defendants were justified in evicting the plaintiff and levying distress on her property.
  3. Whether the defendants returned to the plaintiff all her property which had been seized.
  4. Whether the plaintiff suffered any damages.
  5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies prayed for in the plaint.

Orders

  • Action succeeds in part.
  • Plaintiff awarded nominal damages of UGX 900,000.
  • Plaintiff awarded special damages of UGX 440.
  • Plaintiff awarded general damages of UGX 100,000.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the defendants.
  • Interest on the decretal amount at court rate from date of judgment until payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Landlord and Tenant — Year-to-Year Tenancy — Implied Covenants — Registration of Titles Act s.102(b)
In the absence of a formal written tenancy agreement, section 102(b) of the Registration of Titles Act implies covenants in every lease, including the landlord's power to re-enter and take possession if rent is in arrear for 30 days or more, even without formal demand.
Distress for Rent — Lawfulness — Notice Not Specifying Amount
A notice to vacate that does not specify the amount of rent in arrears does not render distress illegal where the tenant is presumed to know what sums are owing for the premises.
Bailment — Duty of Care — Bailee for No Reward
A bailee, even one for no reward, who accepts custody of property assumes a position of trust and confidence and is under a duty to ensure the property is safe and to account for it until it is returned or lawfully disposed of.
Damages — Proof of Special Damages — Strict Proof Required
Special damages must not only be pleaded but also strictly proved by adducing evidence to support each item claimed. Where evidence is insufficient to establish the value of missing property, nominal damages may be awarded.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (3)

  • Kampala City Council v Kakaye [1972] EA 416
  • Joseph Lukwago v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 1156 of 1988)
  • J.S.B. Mukasa & Another v Uganda Electricity Board (Civil Suit No. 121 of 1986)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kasande v The Administrator General & Another (Civil Suit 965 of 1990) [1992] UGHC 55 (16 March 1992)
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.