Mukisa Mpewo Enterprises Ltd v Kampala City Authority (Misc.Application No. 590 of 2013)
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 where a court order grants a lease or compensation as alternative remedies, and the lessor executes a lease but fails to give vacant possession due to third party occupation, the lessee is entitled to the alternative remedy of compensation assessed at the full market value of the land. The proper procedure is to apply for assessment of the alternative remedy already granted, not to file a fresh suit. A lessee who never obtains possession due to third party occupation is deemed to have been evicted and entitled to damages at market value.
Outcome
Applicant awarded compensation at full market value in lieu of vacant possession of leased land
Facts
The Applicant filed Misc. Cause No. 1 of 2012 seeking to enforce its property rights to Plot 1 Spring Road under Article 50 of the Constitution. On 18 July 2012, the court ordered Kampala Capital City Authority to lease the plot to the Applicant or, in case of non-compliance, pay prompt and adequate compensation. On 3 October 2012, KCCA executed a lease agreement with the Applicant and registered the Applicant's interest on its certificate of title. However, KCCA failed to give vacant possession of the land, which remained occupied by third parties (truck drivers). The Applicant's advocates wrote to KCCA on 4 July 2013 requesting removal of trespassers but received no response. The Applicant then filed this application seeking assessment of compensation as the alternative remedy. The Applicant obtained a valuation report assessing the land at UGX 5,200,000,000.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant is entitled to assessment of compensation as an alternative remedy where the Respondent executed a lease but failed to give vacant possession.
- Whether the proper procedure was to bring a fresh suit for compensation or to apply for assessment under the alternative remedy already granted.
- Whether the Applicant, having entered into a lease agreement with the Respondent, is estopped from seeking compensation as an alternative remedy.
- What is the measure of compensation where a lessee is never put in possession of leased premises occupied by third parties.
Orders
- Application granted.
- Compensation assessed and awarded at UGX 5,200,000,000 (Five Billion Two Hundred Million Shillings).
- Claim for loss of rent from January 2004 to date (UGX 3,846,623,642) declined as speculative.
- Costs awarded to the Applicant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Civil Procedure Act s.34
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
- Civil Procedure Rules O.50 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.50 r.2
- Civil Procedure Rules O.50 r.3
- Constitution of Uganda Art.50
- Land Act Cap 229 s.3(5)(c)
Cases cited (3)
- A M Dharas & Sons Ltd v Elys Ltd (1963) 1 EA 573
- Massa Samwiri v Rose Achen (1978) HCB 297
- Banque Des Marchands de Moscou (Koupetschesky) (In Liquidation) v Kindersley and Another [1950] 2 All ER 549
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.