Wakilii

Makubuya Mohammed and Others v Evelyn Nakimera Bwogi (Miscellaneous Cause 17 of 2023)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 173 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to vacate caveat lodged on applicants' registered land
Decision
Caveat vacated; applicants free to deal with their registered 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 High Court granted the application to vacate a caveat lodged on the applicants' registered land. The court held that the respondent caveator had no sufficient grounds to maintain the caveat where she had failed to file any suit to prove her claim for ten years since lodging the caveat in September 2016. The balance of convenience favoured removal of the caveat.

Outcome

Caveat vacated; applicants free to deal with their registered land

Facts

The applicants are the registered proprietors of land comprised in East Buganda, Bulemezi Block 421 Plot number 21 at Wankanya measuring approximately 9.30 hectares. On 26 September 2016, the respondent lodged a caveat on the land. Since that time, the respondent failed to take any positive action to prove her claim by filing a suit. The applicants were never served with notice of the caveat. The respondent's caveat greatly affected the applicants' ability to deal with their land. The applicants brought this application seeking to vacate the caveat. The respondent did not file any response to the application despite evidence of service.

Issues

  1. Whether the caveator has sufficient grounds to maintain the caveat on land comprised in East Buganda, Bulemezi Block 421 Plot number 21 at Wankanya measuring approximately 9.30 hectares.
  2. Whether the caveator has brought an ordinary suit timeously to prove her claim.
  3. Whether the balance of convenience lies in removing the caveat than maintaining it.

Orders

  • An order is hereby issued that the caveat lodged by the respondent on the applicants' land comprised in East Buganda, Bulemezi Block 421 Plot number 21 at Wankanya be vacated forthwith.
  • No order is made as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Land & Property — Caveats — Grounds for Maintaining Caveat — Caveatable Interest
For a person to lodge a caveat, that person must have a caveatable interest whether legal or equitable in accordance with section 139(1) of the Registration of Titles Act. A caveat is intended to give the caveator temporary protection and to give notice of the nature of the claim to the person whose estate in the land is affected and to the world at large.
Land & Property — Caveats — Removal of Caveat — Test for Removal
A caveator must prove: (1) the caveator has sufficient grounds to maintain the caveat; (2) the caveator has brought an ordinary action timeously against the caveatee; and (3) the balance of convenience lies in maintaining the caveat rather than its removal.
Land & Property — Caveats — Removal of Caveat — Failure to File Suit
Where a caveator has lodged a caveat but has failed to file a suit to prove the claim for a prolonged period (ten years in this case), the court will find no sufficient reason to maintain the caveat and will order its removal. A caveator is required to bring an ordinary suit without undue delay to determine the caveator's rights and obtain a permanent remedy.
Civil Procedure — Caveats — Temporary Protection — Requirement to File Suit
Caveats are meant to be a temporary measure to protect one's land. A caveat is similar to an interlocutory injunction as it only temporarily protects the interests of the caveator who is required to bring an ordinary suit without undue delay to determine the caveator's rights as against other rights or competing interests.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (6)

  • Segirinya Gerald v Mutebi Innocent (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 81 of 2016)
  • Boyes v Gathure (1969) EA 385
  • Rutungu Properties Limited v Linda Harriet Carrington and Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 61 of 2010)
  • Ali Sidi Ngarukiye v Muyonga Andrew Mubiru (Mukono Miscellaneous Cause No. 31 of 2018)
  • Mutumba Ronald v Dirisa Gawano and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 2 of 2022)
  • Teo Ai Choo v Leong Sze Hian (1982) 2 MLJ 72

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makubuya Mohammed and Others v Evelyn Nakimera Bwogi (Miscellaneous Cause 17 of 2023) [2026] UGHC 173 (2 March 2026)
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.