Wakilii

Lilian Katuuka v Kasule Tezigatwa and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 613 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 383 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for contempt orders arising from alleged breach of consent judgment in mediation cause
Decision
Application for contempt dismissed on the ground that the underlying agreement was void for uncertainty

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

Held that an agreement forming the integral basis of a consent judgment, which lacks certain description of the subject matter land, is void for uncertainty under section 22 of the Contracts Act and therefore unenforceable. Consequently, contempt proceedings cannot arise from a consent judgment whose foundation is a void agreement. Application dismissed.

Outcome

Application for contempt dismissed on the ground that the underlying agreement was void for uncertainty

Facts

The applicant and respondents entered into a consent judgment on 9th December 2020 resolving Civil Suit No. 369 of 2020. Under the consent, the 2nd and 3rd respondents agreed to buy alternative land for the 1st respondent so he would vacate the applicant's land. The 1st respondent was given six months to harvest crops and was to cease all claims from 1st May 2021. The consent incorporated a handwritten Luganda agreement dated 1st December 2020. The applicant brought this application alleging the 1st respondent violated the consent by cutting her crops valued at UGX 13,560,000 and that the 2nd and 3rd respondents failed to provide the alternative land. The 1st respondent denied contempt, stating he never received the alternative land. The court found that the 1st December 2020 agreement lacked specific description of the subject matter land.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents were in contempt of the consent judgment dated 9th December 2020.
  2. Whether the agreement dated 1st December 2020 forming the basis of the consent judgment was void for uncertainty under section 22 of the Contracts Act.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Void Contracts — Uncertainty of Terms — Subject Matter
An agreement whose subject matter is not certain or capable of being made certain is void for uncertainty under section 22 of the Contracts Act and is therefore unenforceable.
Civil Procedure — Consent Judgments — Enforceability — Void Underlying Agreement
Where a consent judgment is founded upon an agreement that is void for uncertainty, the consent judgment itself becomes unenforceable and contempt proceedings cannot arise from it.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Prerequisites — Valid and Enforceable Order
Contempt proceedings require a valid and enforceable court order as their foundation. Where the underlying order is based on a void agreement, no question of contempt can arise.

Legislation cited (1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Lilian_Katuuka_v_Kasule_Tezigatwa_and_Others_(Miscellaneous_Application_No._613_of_2025)_[2025]_UGHCLD_383_(7_November_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.