Wakilii

Makumbi Dani v The Board of Governors Mackay College School and Another (Miscellaneous Application 5 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 79 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for contempt of court arising from alleged breach of temporary injunction order in underlying land dispute
Decision
Application for contempt of court dismissed on the ground that the temporary injunction had not been issued at the time of the alleged breach and lack of proof of knowledge by the second respondent

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

Held that the first respondent had actual knowledge of the temporary injunction order and deliberately sold the suit land to a third party during the pendency of the application, acting in bad faith. However, the application for contempt failed because the temporary injunction had not yet been issued at the time of the sale, and there was no proof that the second respondent was aware of the pending application. Application dismissed with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Application for contempt of court dismissed on the ground that the temporary injunction had not been issued at the time of the alleged breach and lack of proof of knowledge by the second respondent

Facts

The applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1835 of 2022 on 28 October 2022 seeking a temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from dealing with land comprised in Block 23 Plot 64 at Nabisasiro-Busega, Kampala District. The first respondent was represented by counsel and participated in the proceedings. On 20 February 2023, during the pendency of the application, the first respondent sold the suit land to the second respondent (a third party) and erected a perimeter wall. The temporary injunction order was eventually issued on 14 June 2023, restraining both parties from selling, excavating, constructing, or creating third party interests on the suit land. Judgment in Misc. App. No. 1835 of 2022 was delivered on 15 May 2023 by email to the parties. The applicant then brought this application seeking to have the respondents held in contempt of the temporary injunction order, committed to civil prison, and ordered to pay fines and exemplary damages.

Issues

  1. Whether the Respondents are in contempt of Court order issued vide Misc. App. No. 1835 of 2022?
  2. What remedies are available to the Applicant?

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Elements Required for Finding of Civil Contempt
Three elements must be proved before a finding of civil contempt can be made: (1) existence of a lawful order that is clear and unambiguous; (2) the party alleged to have breached the order must have had actual knowledge of the order; and (3) the party alleged to have breached the order must have intentionally done the act that the order prohibits and intentionally failed to do the act that the order compels.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Standard of Proof
The standard of proof in contempt proceedings must be higher than proof on the balance of probabilities and almost but not exactly beyond reasonable doubt.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Knowledge of Court Order
A party who knows of an order, whether null or valid, regular or irregular, cannot be permitted to disobey it as long as it exists. A party represented by counsel and participating in proceedings is deemed to have actual knowledge of orders made in those proceedings.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Timing of Breach and Issuance of Order
Where an alleged contemnor's conduct occurs before the temporary injunction order is issued, contempt of court cannot be established even if the conduct was deliberate and in bad faith, because there was no existing order to breach at the time of the conduct.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Exercise of Contempt Power
The contempt power is discretionary and should be used sparingly and with great restraint. It is an enforcement power of last, rather than first resort. Courts should not find contempt too easily, as this would cheapen the role and authority of the judicial power it seeks to protect.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (10)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makumbi_Dani_v_The_Board_of_Governors_Mackay_College_School_and_Another_(Miscellaneous_Application_5_of_2024)_[2025]_UGHCLD_79_(5_May_2025)
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.