Lwalwa Dauson v Kibuku District Local Government (Civil Suit No. 51 of 2020)
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.
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 High Court held that the plaintiff is the lawful owner of the portion of disputed land falling within his registered freehold certificate of title under the Registration of Titles Act s.59, which confers indefeasible title absent proven fraud. The defendant failed to plead or prove fraud. The defendant is a trespasser to the extent it constructed buildings on the plaintiff's titled land. However, the defendant holds equitable ownership of the untitled portion based on long user evidence. The plaintiff is entitled to compensation upon obtaining a valuation report and general damages of UGX 50,000,000.
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff with declaration of ownership over titled portion, defendant declared trespasser, plaintiff awarded general damages and entitled to compensation upon valuation, defendant retains equitable ownership of untitled portion
Facts
The plaintiff claimed ownership of land in Kibuku Town Council acquired as a gift from his father in 1987, later registered under freehold title in 2009 (Block 2, Plots 277 and 218). The defendant, Kibuku District Local Government, constructed its administration block and offices on the land from 2010 onwards. The plaintiff's father had previously donated a small plot to the community for a health centre. The defendant contended the land was donated to the colonial Government by one Kansanga and had been used for government purposes for over 30 years without interruption. The defendant occupied both titled and untitled portions of the disputed land, with approximately 2 acres falling within the plaintiff's registered title.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff is the lawful owner of the suit land entitled to compensation from the defendant?
- Whether the defendant is a trespasser on the suit land?
- Whether the defendant's entry or acquisition of the suit land was tainted with fraud?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- The plaintiff is the lawful owner of the part of the disputed land which falls under the description on the freehold certificate of title registered in his name, for the land comprised in Block 2, Plots 277 and 218, situate at Kibuku.
- Based on the user evidence, the defendant is the equitable lawful owner of the part of the disputed land which does not fall on the plaintiff's certificate of title.
- The defendant is a trespasser on the suit land to the extent that it constructed its premises on the land described in the plaintiff's certificate of title.
- The plaintiff shall be compensated upon obtaining a valuation report from the Government Valuer establishing the current monetary value of a bare/undeveloped land upon which the defendant encroached, being guided by the description of the plaintiff's land comprised in Block 2, Plots 277 and 218, situate at Kibuku, less the land that was donated by the plaintiff's father to Kibuku Sub-County.
- Upon receiving compensation, the plaintiff shall hand over the necessary mutation documents to cause the transfer of the compensated land to the defendant.
- The plaintiff is awarded general damages of UGX 50,000,000.
- The plaintiff is awarded costs of the suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (14)
- Kabali and Another v Attorney General (Civil Appeal No. 50 of 2007)
- Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
- Hezekiah Mukiibi and Another v Commissioner Land Registration and Another (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2024)
- Okello v Uganda National Examination Board (Court of Appeal No. 12 of 1987)
- Kayemba Ronald Watuwa v Makokha Yafesa and Others (Civil Suit No. 51 of 2018)
- Lutaya v Stirling Civil Engineering Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
- SBI International Holdings AG (U) Ltd v COF International Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 14 of 2020)
- Mutekanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd [1995-1998] 2 EA 219
- Tushabe Chris v Cooperative Bank Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2018)
- Hon. Nze Herbert Osuji & Anor. v Anthony Isiocha (1989) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 111) 623 at 636
- Daramshi v Karsan [1974] 1 EA 41
- Thalion International Ltd v Vivo Energy Uganda Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2022)
- Inverugie Investments Ltd v Hackett [1995] 3 All ER 841
- Francis Butagira v Deborah Mukasa (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1989)
Cases citing this judgment (2)
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.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.