Lukoma & 2 Others v The Registered Trustees of the Society of the Missionaries of Africa (White Fathers) (Civil Application 16 of 2024)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

On an application for an interim order of stay of execution in a protracted land dispute, the Supreme Court (Chibita JSC) overruled two preliminary objections: that the 3rd applicant's affidavit lacked written authority from the other applicants (a curable irregularity, since all were parties knowledgeable of the facts under Article 126(2)(e)), and that the application should first have been filed in the Court of Appeal (Rule 41(2) confers a discretion to entertain it). Although the applicants showed no actual threat of execution, the Court, to preserve the status quo and given that the respondent was not in physical possession, granted an order restraining interference with or development of the suit land pending the substantive application. Costs in the cause.

Outcome

Interim order granted to preserve the status quo over the suit land pending determination of the substantive application.

Facts

The applicants claim to be lineal descendants of the original owners of land at Mawokota Block 195 plot 2, ancestral land of the Ngeye clan. They allege the respondent fraudulently sub-divided the land into plots 3 and 4 and obtained registration. A caveat was lodged and litigation began in 1997. The High Court, in Civil Suit No. 739 of 1997, found in the applicants' favour and ordered cancellation of the respondent's title on grounds of fraud. The respondent successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal, which set aside the High Court judgment. The applicants appealed to the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 0001 of 2023) and filed an application for a temporary injunction. Pending those, the applicants alleged that the respondent and third parties claiming under it were mining sand, cutting trees, demarcating and constructing on the land, threatening the clan's cultural sites. The respondent denied being in physical possession or taking any step to alienate, develop or destroy the land.

Issues

1. Whether the supporting affidavit, sworn by the 3rd applicant without written authority from the 1st and 2nd applicants, rendered the application incompetent.
2. Whether the application was premature for not having been filed in the Court of Appeal first under Rule 41(1).
3. Whether the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution were satisfied, in particular whether there was a threat of execution.

Orders

• First preliminary objection (defective affidavit for want of written authority) overruled.
• Second preliminary objection (application not first filed in the Court of Appeal) overruled.
• Order granted preserving the status quo by restraining interference with and development of the suit land pending determination of the substantive application or until further orders of the Court.
• The Registrar directed to cause-list the substantive application at the next convenient session.
• Costs to be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 2(2)
• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 6(2)
• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 41(1)
• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 41(2)
• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 42
• Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions Rule 43
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 1 rule 12(2)
• Constitution of Uganda Article 126(2)(e)

Cases cited (11)

• Hwang Sung Industries Limited V. Tajdin Hussein & 2 Ors No. 19 of 2008
• Hwang Sung Industries Limited v Tajdin Hussein & Others, No.4 of 2014
• Kaingana v Dabo Boubou [1986]
• Lena Nakalema Binaisa & 3 Others v Mucunguzi Myers (Miscellaneous Application No. 460 of 2013)
• Bankone Ltd v Simbamanyo Estate Ltd (HCMA No. 645 of 2020)
• Namutebi Matilda v Ssemanda Simon & 2 Ors (HCMA No. 430 of 2021)
• Theodore Sekikubo & 4 Ors v Attorney General & 4 Ors. No. 4 of 2014 (SC)
• Guiliano Garigio v Calaudio Casadio No. 5 of 2013(SC)
• Besigye Kiiza v Museveni Yoweri Kaguta and Another [2001] UGSC
• Bakaluba Peter Mukasa v Namboze Betty Bakireke (Election Petition Appeal No. 4 of 2009)
• Hezekiah Mukiibi & Anor v The Commissioner Land Registration & Anor. No.39 of 2023(SC)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Haruna Sentongo v I & M Bank (U) Limited (Civil Application 3 of 2025)

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