Wakilii

Masaba v Werishe (HCT-04-CV-CS-0003-2015)

High Court · [2016] UGHCLD 41 · 2016 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass and related relief
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with orders for demolition of wall, declaration of trespass, permanent injunction, damages, interest and costs

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 the defendant's perimeter wall encroached onto the plaintiff's land by 2.2 metres (0.02 acres), constituting trespass. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff with orders for a declaration of trespass, permanent injunction, demolition of the offending wall, general damages of UGX 4,000,000, punitive damages of UGX 1,000,000, interest at court rate on general damages from judgment date, and costs.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with orders for demolition of wall, declaration of trespass, permanent injunction, damages, interest and costs

Facts

The plaintiff and defendant owned adjoining plots (Plot 17 and Plot 15 respectively) on Wanale Road, Mbale Municipality, separated by a perimeter wall constructed by the defendant. The plaintiff claimed the defendant's wall trespassed onto his land. The parties agreed to have a joint surveyor determine the boundary and report findings. The survey report dated 30 November 2015 by Synergy Surveys & Associates found that the defendant's perimeter wall on Plot 15 encroached into Plot 17 by 2.2 metres, taking approximately 0.02 acres. The plaintiff sought a declaration of trespass, permanent injunction, demolition order, and damages.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant's perimeter wall trespasses on the plaintiff's land.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Judgment entered against the defendant for trespass.
  • Declaration that defendant is in trespass on plaintiff's land at Plot 17 Wanale Road, Mbale.
  • Permanent injunction restraining defendants from continued trespass on plaintiff's land.
  • Order for removal/demolition of the perimeter wall.
  • General damages awarded to plaintiff in the sum of UGX 4,000,000.
  • Punitive damages awarded to plaintiff in the sum of UGX 1,000,000.
  • Interest at court rate on general damages from date of judgment to payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass — Encroachment by Boundary Wall — Proof by Joint Survey
Where parties agree to be bound by the findings of a joint survey report on disputed boundaries, and the survey establishes encroachment, the court will enter judgment for trespass based on those findings.
Remedies for Trespass — Demolition of Encroaching Structure
Upon establishing trespass by encroachment of a boundary wall onto registered land, the court will grant a declaration of trespass, permanent injunction, and order demolition of the offending structure.
General Damages — Trespass on Land — Assessment of Loss of Use
General damages for trespass on prime land under development are assessed by reference to the loss of utilisation of the land and its capacity for appreciation in value, calculated per annum from the date of trespass to judgment.
Punitive Damages — Trespass — Continued Refusal to Remedy Despite Notice
Punitive damages may be awarded for trespass where the defendant persists in the trespass despite amicable approaches and the issue being brought to his attention, to deter repetition of the offending conduct.

Cases cited (2)

  • Stroms v Hutchinson (1905) AC
  • Butterworth v Butterworth (1920) P 126

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Masaba v Werishe (HCT-04-CV-CS-0003-2015) [2016] UGHCLD 41 (4 November 2016)
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.