Wakilii

Kato & 4 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority & 2 Others (Civil Suit 1253 of 2021)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 4 · 2025 Preliminary Objection Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on preliminary objections raised by defendants in a civil suit for compensation arising from alleged unlawful eviction and demolition
Decision
Preliminary objections dismissed; matter to proceed to trial on the merits

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 overruled preliminary objections challenging limitation and joinder of individual defendants, holding that both objections raised factual disputes requiring determination on the merits. The characterisation of the claim as tort or recovery of land and the applicability of statutory protection to individual defendants could not be resolved on pleadings alone.

Outcome

Preliminary objections dismissed; matter to proceed to trial on the merits

Facts

The plaintiffs, numbering 428, claimed they were lawful tenants on land rented from Uganda Railways Corporation and operated there legally. On 27 July 2014, the defendants allegedly unlawfully evicted them and demolished their market structures, causing financial loss. The plaintiffs filed suit on 3 April 2017 seeking compensation and general damages. The suit was initially filed in the Civil Division as Civil Suit No. 146 of 2017, then transferred to the Land Division and renumbered as Civil Suit No. 1253 of 2021. The defendants raised preliminary objections on limitation and joinder, arguing the suit was barred as a tort claim filed beyond the two-year limitation period and that the individual defendants were protected by statute.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff's suit is barred by the law on limitation
  2. Whether the suit is incompetent against the 2nd and 3rd defendants

Orders

  • Preliminary objections overruled.
  • No order as to costs.
  • Matters to be framed as issues for determination in the joint scheduling memorandum.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Requirement for Ascertained and Undisputed Facts
A preliminary objection must be based on ascertained and undisputed facts from which the court can draw a reasonable inference without considering evidence or determining disputed facts.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Deferral to Merits Where Facts Disputed
Where the facts underlying a preliminary objection are disputed by the parties or require analysis beyond pleadings alone, the objection goes to the merits and should be joined with the substantive trial rather than determined summarily.
Civil Procedure — Limitation — Necessity to Characterise Nature of Action Before Applying Limitation Period
Before determining whether a claim is time-barred, the court must first identify the nature of the cause of action to determine the applicable limitation period, and where the characterisation of the claim is disputed, this determination should be made on the merits.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (4)

  • Yaya Farajallah v Obir Ronald and 3 Others (Court of Appeal No. 81 of 2018)
  • Tibawaasa Edresa v Rawabuheesi Micheal (Court of Appeal No. 56 of 2023)
  • Kiwanuka Fredrick Kakumutwe v Kibirige Edward (Civil Appeal No. 272 of 2017)
  • Bank of Uganda and Another v Kaweesi Sulaiman and 26 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1047 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kato_&_4_Others_v_Kampala_Capital_City_Authority_&_2_Others_(Civil_Suit_1253_of_2021)_[2025]_UGHCLD_4_(16_January_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.