Kwesiga v Uganda Electricity Distribution Co. Limited and 2 Others (EDT COMPLAINT 19 of 2014)
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 Tribunal held that the 1st Respondent (UEDCL) was vested with the 33-11KV Kabale substation and associated power lines under Statutory Instrument No. 28 of 2002, including all rights and liabilities. The construction and maintenance of power lines over the Complainant's property without consent or compensation constituted continuing trespass. The 1st Respondent and Attorney General were held jointly and severally liable to pay UGX 180,000,000 in general damages and UGX 120,000 for fruit trees, with the Attorney General liable to contribute in whole given that the Electricity Regulatory Authority ceased providing for wayleave compensation in tariff computations.
Outcome
Complaint granted with damages and costs awarded to Complainant; 1st and 2nd Respondents held jointly and severally liable
Facts
In 1997, Uganda Electricity Board constructed 33KV power supply lines over property jointly owned by the Complainant and two others, comprised in Plot 193 Block 3 Ndorwa Kabale. The property was developed with a four-bedroom bungalow and servant's quarters. The lines were constructed without notification, consent, or compensation to the owners. Following the Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Statute (Vesting of Undertaking of Uganda Electricity Board) Statutory Instrument No. 28 of 2002, the power distribution network including the 33-11KV Kabale substation was transferred to UEDCL (1st Respondent) on 30 March 2001. The power lines remained operational. The Complainant sought compensation for trespass, loss of use, and damage to property. The 1st Respondent denied liability, arguing that compensation obligations were not transferred. The Electricity Regulatory Authority ceased providing for wayleave compensation in tariff computations and advised that Government should handle such matters.
Issues
- Whether the Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Act (Vesting of Undertaking of Uganda Electricity Board), No. 28 of 2002 vested the liability of the line over the Complainant's property to the 1st Respondent, or the same remained the liability of the Uganda Electricity Board (in Liquidation)?
- What are the remedies the Complainant is entitled to?
Orders
- General damages of UGX 180,000,000 awarded to the Complainant.
- Special damages of UGX 120,000 awarded for value of fruit trees.
- 1st Respondent and 2nd Respondent held jointly and severally liable for the compensation.
- 2nd Respondent (Attorney General) held liable to contribute in whole for the compensation.
- Costs of the Complaint awarded to the Complainant.
- Interest at 12% per annum on the decretal sum from the date of judgment until payment in full.
- Complainant's retention of property deemed implied consent for 1st Respondent to maintain electricity lines overhead without further tortious liability from date of receipt of decretal sum.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 26
- Electricity Act Cap 144 (1964 Revision) s.9
- Electricity Act Cap 144 (1964 Revision) s.55
- Electricity Act Cap 145 s.125
- Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Statute 1993 (Statute No. 9 of 1993) s.25A(1)
- Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Statute 1993 (Statute No. 9 of 1993) s.26(4)
- Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Statute (Vesting of Undertaking of Uganda Electricity Board) Statutory Instrument No. 28 of 2002 Regulation 2(c)
- Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture Statute (Vesting of Undertaking of Uganda Electricity Board) Statutory Instrument No. 28 of 2002 Regulation 2(e)
Cases cited (1)
- Uganda Electricity Board (in Liquidation) v Royal Van Zayten (HCT-OO-CC-MA-0251-2006)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.