Wakilii

Kayimbye Sebinene v Hon P. K. Ssemwogerere And Another (Civil Suit 957 of 1993)

High Court · [1997] UGHC 7 · 1997 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass to land and damages arising from alleged unauthorised excavation of murram
Decision
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; defendants not held liable

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 plaintiff sued defendants personally and representatively for trespass arising from alleged unauthorised excavation of murram from his registered land during preparations for the coronation of the Kabaka of Buganda. The court found that although the plaintiff was the registered proprietor, he was not in actual possession of the land — his brother who cultivated it was. The plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendants or their employed servants excavated the murram. The suit was dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Outcome

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; defendants not held liable

Facts

The plaintiff, registered proprietor of land at Nalumenyc, Busiro County, alleged that in June 1993 the defendants — chairman and secretary of the committee organising the coronation of the Kabaka of Buganda — caused persons to trespass on his land and excavate murram valued at UGX 5,049,000 for road repairs leading to the coronation site. The plaintiff's brother Sekamwa cultivated the land and discovered the excavation. The defendants denied the allegations, contending that any murram used was voluntarily offered ex gratia and that they were not vicariously liable. The defence produced evidence that the area had been a murram quarry since the 1950s, that Sekamwa had offered murram and requested a letter, and that the committee consisted of volunteers who contributed materials freely.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the land comprised in Block 347 plot 79.
  2. Whether murram was actually excavated from the land.
  3. Whether the plaintiff consented to the extraction of the murram.
  4. Whether the defendants are liable.
  5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any remedy.

Orders

  • Suit dismissed.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass to Land — Standing and Possession
An action for trespass to land must be brought by a person in actual possession of the land, as trespass is an interference with possession and not ownership; the person in physical control of the land is entitled to sue.
Burden of Proof — Civil Trespass Claims
A plaintiff alleging trespass must prove on a balance of probabilities the identity of the persons who committed the acts of trespass and that those persons were employed by or acting on behalf of the defendants.
Vicarious Liability — Volunteers
Where acts of trespass are committed by volunteers who have not been employed by the defendants, the defendants are not vicariously liable; the volunteers would be personally liable for any torts committed.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kayimbye Sebinene v Hon P. K. Ssemwogerere And Another (Civil Suit 957 of 1993) [1997] UGHC 7 (11 February 1997)
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.