Wakilii

Medius Kemirembe v Juliet Kiconco and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1005 of 2023)

High Court · [2026] UGHCFD 20 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Objector application arising from execution proceedings in a divorce decree
Decision
Application dismissed; cattle remain subject to attachment in execution of divorce decree

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 dismissed an objector application seeking to prevent attachment of 195 heads of cattle in execution of a divorce decree. The court struck out the applicant's affidavits for non-compliance with the Oaths Act after finding she was not present when they were purportedly sworn and her signatures were inconsistent. On the merits, the court held that the applicant failed to prove the cattle were in her possession on her own account at the time of attachment, as required under Order 22 Rule 57 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Outcome

Application dismissed; cattle remain subject to attachment in execution of divorce decree

Facts

The 1st Respondent obtained a divorce decree against the 2nd Respondent (her former husband) awarding her 150 heads of cattle and UGX 30,000,000 as alimony. When bailiffs attempted to execute the decree by attaching cattle on land comprised in Buddu Block 992 Plot 2, the Applicant (the 2nd Respondent's mother) filed an objector application claiming the 195 heads of cattle belonged to her and were on her exclusive farmland. The land in question formed part of the estate of the late Matambara Muhwezi Geoffrey, which had been distributed among beneficiaries including both the Applicant and the 2nd Respondent, each receiving defined portions. The 2nd Respondent had previously obstructed execution and was found in contempt of court. The Applicant had filed multiple objector applications over time, most of which were withdrawn.

Issues

  1. Whether the 195 heads of cattle on the Applicant's farmland comprised in Buddu Block 992 Plot 2 at Kamugo Estate should be subject to attachment?
  2. Whether the land comprised in Buddu Block 992 Plot 2 entirely belongs to the Applicant to constitute her exclusive farmland?
  3. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The affidavit in support of the amended application and the affidavit in rejoinder are struck out.
  • The application is dismissed.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the 1st Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Affidavit Evidence — Validity — Compliance with Oaths Act
An affidavit purportedly sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths must be struck out where the deponent's own testimony establishes she was not present at the place and time stated in the jurat, and where material inconsistencies exist in the signatures across multiple documents that cannot be explained by natural variation.
Civil Procedure — Signature Verification — Expert Evidence
Expert handwriting evidence is not necessary where discrepancies in signatures are numerous, consistent across several documents, extend beyond stylistic differences to include variations in spelling and format, and are compounded by the deponent's own demonstration of her signature, such that the inconsistencies are apparent to any lay observer.
Civil Procedure — Notice of Motion — Supporting Affidavits
Where an application is brought by notice of motion under Order 52 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the law does not require that supporting affidavit evidence be sworn by the applicant personally; competent affidavit evidence from other deponents establishing the factual basis of the application is sufficient to sustain the application.
Civil Procedure — Objector Proceedings — Burden of Proof
In objector proceedings under Order 22 Rules 55 to 57 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the burden lies on the objector to prove on a balance of probabilities that at the date of attachment he or she had an interest in the property attached and that it was in his or her possession on his or her own account, not on account of or in trust for the judgment debtor.
Civil Procedure — Objector Proceedings — Standard of Proof — Possession
General evidence that an objector is known in an area as a cattle keeper and has cattle on land is insufficient to discharge the burden in objector proceedings; the objector must adduce specific evidence such as vaccination records, branding marks, treatment books, sale and purchase records, movement permits, or testimony of herdsmen capable of linking the specific property sought to be released to the objector's exclusive possession at the time of attachment.
Land & Property — Estate Administration — Distributed Estate Property
Where land forms part of an estate that has been distributed among beneficiaries, each occupying defined portions, the mere presence of movable property on the land does not establish that such property is in the possession of the estate administratrix on her own account, as the property could be located on any portion belonging to the various beneficiaries.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (1)

  • Kabweru Wilson v Nkerenge Faith (High Court Civil Appeal No. 23 of 2024)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Medius Kemirembe v Juliet Kiconco and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1005 of 2023) [2026] UGHCFD 20 (14 April 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.