Wakilii

Mboineki and Others v Gahwera and Others (LAND CIVIL SUIT NO.045 OF 2023)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 233 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiffs AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for declaration of ownership, injunction, eviction, and damages regarding land in Buliisa district
Decision
Judgment entered in favour of Plaintiffs with declaration of ownership, permanent injunction, eviction order, and damages; Defendants to be evicted from the suit 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 held that plaintiffs, as members of Kirama Farmers Group, proved on the balance of probabilities that they are the rightful customary owners of the disputed land. The court found that defendants' possession resulted from trespass, not true ownership, and relied on a local government Adhoc Committee report confirming plaintiffs' ownership. The court granted a declaration of ownership, permanent injunction, eviction order, and general damages of UGX 340 million.

Outcome

Judgment entered in favour of Plaintiffs with declaration of ownership, permanent injunction, eviction order, and damages; Defendants to be evicted from the suit land

Facts

The plaintiffs, suing in a representative capacity for 173 farmers, claimed customary ownership of land in Buliisa district which they used for grazing and cultivation. In 2018, during surveys for oil pipeline Resettlement Action Plan 2, the defendants claimed ownership and signed consents as rightful owners. The plaintiffs lodged complaints with Atacama Consulting Agency and Kigwera Sub County, which constituted an Adhoc Committee. The Committee investigated and issued a report confirming plaintiffs' ownership. The plaintiffs alleged that defendants fraudulently claimed the land, intimidated farmers, cut down trees, and illegally constructed structures to benefit from oil pipeline compensation. Defendants claimed they were born on and customarily inherited the land from their forefathers of the Bakurasi-Bagema clan, and that plaintiffs were land grabbers with no development on the land.

Issues

  1. Which of the parties is the lawful owner of the suit land?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Declaration that the Plaintiffs and 170 Others are the rightful owners of the suit land.
  • Permanent injunction halting the Defendants from trespassing on the suit land.
  • Eviction order against the Defendants from the suit land.
  • General damages of UGX 340,000,000 awarded to the Plaintiffs (UGX 2,000,000 per plaintiff/estate).
  • Interest at 12% per annum on general damages from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiffs.
  • Claim for compensation for damage to land and trees dismissed for lack of evidence.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Burden of Proof — Civil Suits — Standard of Balance of Probabilities
In civil suits, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff who must prove the case on the balance of probabilities; the burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on the person who wishes the court to believe in its existence.
Evidence — Public Documents — Admissibility Under Evidence Act s.73(a)(ii) — No Requirement for Authors to Testify
A public document under Evidence Act s.73(a)(ii) is admissible for proof of its contents under ss.75, 76 and 77(1)(c) without requiring the authors or responsible officers to testify, save if the contents are contested with adverse evidence.
Evidence — Certification of Documents — No Requirement for Cover Letter
There is no legal requirement that a certifying officer of a document must necessarily attach a cover letter to prove the certification of the document.
Land Law — Customary Ownership — Proof of Ownership — Possession and Utilisation
Customary ownership of land may be proved through evidence of continuous possession, agricultural activities, and utilisation of the land, supported by local government investigation reports and findings from locus in quo visits.
Land Law — Trespass — Possession Arising from Trespass Distinguished from True Ownership
Possession of land arising from trespass does not confer ownership; where defendants' possession is found to be a consequence of trespass to land owned by plaintiffs rather than a result of true ownership, the plaintiffs are entitled to eviction orders and damages.
Damages — General Damages — Assessment — Trauma and Inconvenience from Violent Denial of Land Use
General damages for violent denial of use of land may be assessed based on the trauma and inconvenience occasioned to the plaintiffs, the value of the subject matter, economic inconvenience, and the nature and extent of the injury or loss.
Civil Procedure — Representative Actions — Defence by Non-Representative Defendants
Where defendants do not file a defence or testify and their case is not a representative action defence under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the evidence of some defendants cannot be taken to be that of defendants who did not testify.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (6)

  • Sebuliba v Cooperative Bank Ltd [1982] HCB 130
  • Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 1993)
  • Drabo Stanley v Madira Jimmy (High Court Civil Suit No. 24 of 2013)
  • Wangala Philip v Steel & Tube Industries Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 212 of 2018)
  • Asiimwe Merida v Mujuni Alex (Chief Magistrate's Court Buliisa Civil Suit No. 03 of 2020)
  • Wandera Christopher and Another v Mujuni Alex and Another (Chief Magistrate's Court Buliisa Civil Suit No. 17 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mboineki and Others v Gahwera and Others (LAND CIVIL SUIT NO.045 OF 2023) [2025] UGHC 233 (3 February 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.