Wakilii

Makerere University v St. Mark Education Centre and Another (Civil Suit 378 of 1990)

High Court · [1990] UGHC 49 · 1990 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass, eviction, and cancellation of fraudulently created titles on plaintiff's freehold land
Decision
Defendants evicted; fraudulent Mailo titles for plots 387, 397, and 402 cancelled; plaintiff's freehold title affirmed over the disputed land

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 court held that plots 387, 397, and 402 purportedly on Kibuga Mailo Block 38 were in fact part of Makerere University's freehold land granted in 1943. The creation of the Mailo plots in the early 1990s constituted fraud outside the register, as Mailo land was last lawfully created in the 1930s. Though the defendants were innocent victims who purchased in good faith, they could not invoke section 182 of the Registration of Titles Act because the fraud occurred outside the register—the plots had no lawful origin. The court ordered eviction, cancellation of titles, and nominal damages for innocent trespass.

Outcome

Defendants evicted; fraudulent Mailo titles for plots 387, 397, and 402 cancelled; plaintiff's freehold title affirmed over the disputed land

Facts

In 1943, Makerere University acquired 277.80 acres of freehold land at Makerere under Freehold Register Vol. 59, Folio 21. In the early 1990s, plots 387, 397, and 402 purportedly on Kibuga Mailo Block 38 were registered and sold to the defendants. The 1st defendant purchased plot 386, subdivided it into plots 397 and 402, and later acquired plot 387. The defendants made inquiries with the University, local authorities, and the Ministry of Lands before purchase, and the University initially indicated it had no development plans for the area. A 1990s survey revealed the plots fell within the University's freehold land, not on Mailo Block 38. The Ministry of Lands files lacked required documentation (transfers, ministerial consents, tax clearances). The officer who registered the titles was dismissed. The court found the Mailo plots were fraudulently created outside the register decades after Mailo land ceased to be lawfully created.

Issues

  1. Whether the plots in issue are on the plaintiff's freehold land?
  2. Whether there was fraud in the creation of the said plots?
  3. Whether the defendants were party to fraud in this matter, if any?
  4. Whether the defendants were bona fide purchasers of the plots in issue?

Orders

  • The defendants are hereby evicted from the suit premises.
  • The defendants are permanently restrained from entering on or building on the suit premises.
  • The defendants to pay the plaintiff general damages in the sum of UGS 50,000/- for trespass.
  • The titles under plots Nos. 387, 397 and 402 on the purported Kibuga Mailo Block 38 be cancelled.
  • The defendants to pay the costs of this suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Land Registration — Fraud Outside the Register — Indefeasibility of Title
Where fraud in the creation of a registered title occurs outside the register—such that the land purportedly registered does not exist or was never lawfully available for registration—a purchaser cannot invoke the protection of section 182 of the Registration of Titles Act. The purchaser acquires nothing because the vendor had nothing to convey.
Mailo Land — Unlawful Creation — Historical Limitations
Mailo land was last lawfully created in Uganda in the 1930s. The purported creation of Mailo land in the 1990s is anomalous and constitutes fraud, particularly where such land is superimposed on existing freehold tenure.
Burden of Proof — Bona Fide Purchaser for Value
A defendant asserting the defence of bona fide purchaser for value bears the burden of proving not only that they acted in good faith and paid value, but also that the fraud was committed on the register, not outside it.
Trespass to Land — Innocent Trespass — Nominal Damages
Where a defendant is an innocent victim of fraud and trespasses on land without knowledge that their title is invalid, and no actual damage is alleged, the court may award nominal damages only.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (1)

  • Frazer v Walker & Others at page 499

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makerere University v St. Mark Education Centre and Another (Civil Suit 378 of 1990) [1990] UGHC 49 (4 September 1990)
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.