Kutosi Ben v The Estate of the Late Waneloba Stephen Namalea (Miscellaneous Application 76 of 2025)
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 declined both prayers. Leave to file an inventory out of time was refused because the Letters of Probate had already expired, rendering the application moot. The application for extension of the Letters of Probate was dismissed for failure to comply with the mandatory statutory requirement under Section 256(3)(b)(2) of the Succession Act to obtain the consent of all beneficiaries, notwithstanding that the applicant had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in completing administration.
Outcome
Application dismissed on both prayers
Facts
On 10 November 2021, the applicant was granted Letters of Probate by the High Court pursuant to the Will of the deceased Waneloba Stephen Namalea. Shortly thereafter, on 26 November 2021, a revocation suit (Civil Suit No. 16 of 2021) was filed against him, which was only concluded on 30 November 2024. The applicant was unable to file the required inventory within the statutory six-month period due to the pending litigation. By the time the suit concluded, the Letters of Probate were due to expire on 31 May 2025. The applicant sought leave to file the inventory out of time and an extension of the Letters of Probate to complete administration, noting that certain properties remained unadministered, including land bequeathed to daughters and the ancestral home.
Issues
- Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an inventory out of time in Administration Cause No. 0086 of 2021.
- Whether the Letters of Probate issued under Administration Cause No. 0086 of 2021 should be extended for a reasonable period.
Orders
- Extension of the grant is declined for failure to comply with the mandatory consent requirement under Section 256(3)(b)(2) of the Succession Act.
- The costs of this application shall be borne by the estate.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.337(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.337(4)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.273(1)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.273(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.256(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.256(3)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.256(3)(b)(2)
- Judicature Act Cap. 13 s.37
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules S.I. 71-1 Order 52 Rules 1, 2 & 3
Cases cited (3)
- Mrs. Mary Beatrice Banura; In Re the Estate of the Late Andrea Rusoke (Miscellaneous Application No. 62 of 2025)
- Leo Kaliba and another; In Re the Estate of the Late Zakayo Musana (Miscellaneous Application No. 52 of 2025)
- Kakumba Bernard Tamale & Others v Wanyana Teo & Others [2025] UGHC 772
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.