Wakilii

Luboyera v UMEME Limited (EDT COMPLAINT 6 of 2022)

Tribunal · [2023] UGEDT 1 · 2023 Complaint Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Complaint transferred from High Court for trespass and deprivation of property rights
Decision
Complaint allowed with damages, injunction, and removal order issued against UMEME Ltd

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 Electricity Disputes Tribunal held that UMEME Ltd committed trespass by erecting an electric pole and wires on the complainant's registered land without consent. The tribunal awarded general damages of UGX 30,000,000 with 8% interest per annum, issued a permanent injunction restraining further trespass, and ordered removal of the pole and wires. If removal does not occur, UMEME must compensate the complainant for the land at a valuation by the Chief Government Valuer.

Outcome

Complaint allowed with damages, injunction, and removal order issued against UMEME Ltd

Facts

Luboyera James purchased land comprised in Block 107, Plot 658 Kyadondo at Nakasanjje and later sold it to Kikonyogo Cyprian for UGX 200,000,000. The buyer discovered an electric pole and wires erected by UMEME Ltd on the land and terminated the sale agreement, demanding a refund plus 10% interest. The complainant refunded the purchase price by selling other plots of land. The complainant approached UMEME to remove the pole and wires but received no response. UMEME failed to appear at the tribunal hearing. The complainant testified that he cannot use or sell the land due to the overhead wires and pole.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondent trespassed onto the suit land?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Complaint allowed.
  • Declaration that the Respondent has no claim over the Complainant's land.
  • General damages of UGX 30,000,000 awarded to the Complainant with interest at 8% per annum from date of judgment till payment in full.
  • Permanent injunction issued against the Respondent restraining the Respondent, its agents, servants and workers from further acts of trespass and forcible entry.
  • Respondent directed to remove its pole and wires from the Complainant's land.
  • Unless the Respondent removes the impugned wires, the Respondent shall compensate the Complainant for the land for an amount to be established by the Chief Government Valuer.
  • Respondent to pay half the costs of this complaint.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass to Land — Elements of Proof
To prove trespass to land, a complainant must establish three elements: that the disputed land belongs to him, that the respondent entered upon the land, and that the entry was unlawful in that the respondent had no claim or interest in the land.
Trespass to Land — Definition
Trespass to land occurs when a person makes an unauthorized entry upon another's land thereby interfering with another person's lawful possession of the land.
General Damages — Compensatory Principle
A plaintiff who suffers damage due to the wrongful acts of the defendant must be put in the same position he or she would have been in if he or she had not suffered the wrong.
Utility Infrastructure — Consent Requirement
A utility company that erects electric poles and wires on private land without the owner's knowledge and consent commits trespass and may be ordered to remove the infrastructure or compensate the landowner.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Sheik Mohammed Lubowa v Karitas Enterprise Ltd (Court of Appeal No. 4 of 1987)
  • Justine E. M. N Lutaaya v Stirling Civil Eng. (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
  • Charles Acire v Nyaane Engola (High Court Civil Suit No. 143 of 1993)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Luboyera v UMEME Limited (EDT COMPLAINT 6 of 2022) [2023] UGEDT 1 (20 December 2023)
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.