Wakilii

Matser v Jingo and Another (Civil Appeal 65 of 2020)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 187 · 2024 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from Chief Magistrate's Court decision dismissing application for leave to construct access road
Decision
Lower court proceedings declared void for want of jurisdiction; appellant advised to follow correct statutory procedure under Roads Act 2019 s.60

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 trial magistrate lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter after September 25, 2019 when the Roads Act 2019 commenced and repealed the Access to Roads Act. Section 60 of the Roads Act vests jurisdiction over access road applications in the Minister responsible for roads, not the courts. All proceedings, ruling and orders of the trial court declared void ab initio for want of jurisdiction. Appeal allowed on jurisdictional grounds only.

Outcome

Lower court proceedings declared void for want of jurisdiction; appellant advised to follow correct statutory procedure under Roads Act 2019 s.60

Facts

The appellant owned Plot 251 and claimed entitlement to an access road to Kigo Road through the respondents' adjoining Plots 644 and 915, pursuant to a 2001 lease agreement. He alleged that the access road existed and was used from 2007 until September 2017 when the respondents blocked it. The respondents denied blocking any access road and stated that no easement was registered on their plots. The respondents asserted an alternative access road existed and that the former owner of Plot 915 confirmed no access road existed through that plot. The appellant applied under the Access to Roads Act Cap. 350 for leave to construct an access road. The Chief Magistrate's Court dismissed the application on June 30, 2020.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial magistrate had jurisdiction to hear and determine the application after commencement of the Roads Act 2019.
  2. Whether the learned trial magistrate erred in disregarding evidence on record and at the locus visit.
  3. Whether the appellant proved the existence of an access road through the respondents' land.
  4. Whether the appellant proved failed negotiations with adjoining landowners.

Orders

  • Declaration made that the proceedings, ruling and orders of the trial magistrate in Misc. Cause No. 23 of 2019 are a nullity and void ab initio for want of jurisdiction.
  • Proceedings, ruling and orders set aside.
  • Appellant advised to follow correct procedure under Roads Act 2019 s.60.
  • Costs of appeal awarded to respondents against appellant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Statutory Ouster of Jurisdiction — Effect of Repeal and Replacement
Where a statute conferring jurisdiction on courts is repealed and replaced by a new statute vesting jurisdiction in a different authority, courts cease to have jurisdiction over pending matters upon commencement of the new statute.
Administrative Law — Roads — Access Roads — Jurisdiction under Roads Act 2019
Under section 60 of the Roads Act 2019, jurisdiction to grant leave to construct access roads through private adjoining property is vested in the Minister responsible for roads, not the courts of judicature.
Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Bar to Cognizance — Express and Implied Bars
A court shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature except suits of which its cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. Where a later statute expressly confers jurisdiction on a different authority, the cognizance of courts is expressly barred.
Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Nullity — Effect of Proceedings Without Jurisdiction
Where a court lacks jurisdiction over a matter, all its proceedings, decisions and orders arising out of that matter are no proceedings at all and no decision at all. They are a nullity and void ab initio with no legal effect.
Land & Property — Access Roads — Burden of Proof — Negotiation Requirement
An applicant seeking leave to construct an access road through adjoining property must prove both the existence of any alleged access road and that negotiations with adjoining landowners have failed. Mere allegations without supporting evidence are insufficient to discharge this burden.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (4)

  • Dinkerrai R. Pandya v R [1957] E.A 336
  • Desai v Warsama [1957] 1 E.A 351
  • Eriazali Bameka v Dodyico Nvirilo (Civil Revision No. 1 of 1973)
  • David Ssejjaaka Nalima v Rebecca Musoke (Court of Appeal No. 12 of 1985)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Matser_v_Jingo_and_Another_(Civil_Appeal_65_of_2020)_[2024]_UGHCLD_187_(11_July_2024)
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.