Munyagwa and 6 Others v Lukonge and 2 Others (HCT-00-LD-CS 73 of 2019)
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 a claim for an easement of right of way over defendants' registered land based on long usage. The court held that under the Roads Access Act, an access road cannot be acquired by conduct or long usage alone; a formal statutory procedure through the land tribunal is required. Even where alternative routes are longer or less convenient, no automatic right of way arises without due legal process and compensation.
Outcome
Suit dismissed without costs; plaintiffs denied remedies sought
Facts
The plaintiffs claimed they had enjoyed access to a road known as Lake View Drive through plot 3532 for over 40 years, which the defendants allegedly blocked unreasonably and unlawfully. The defendants, children of the late Josephine Lukonge, registered proprietor of plot 3532, denied the claim, stating there was no gazetted road on their land and that the plaintiffs had access to their homes through Pepsi Road in Kansanga. The plaintiffs sought to establish a right of way based on long usage. The court found no evidence of legal acquisition of an access road or compensation paid. The 1st defendant testified that his late father protested trespassers regularly. Plaintiffs in cross-examination confirmed no compensation had been paid and that the 1st plaintiff sought free access as others passed through his land.
Issues
- Whether the plaint in as far as 2nd to 7th plaintiff discloses a cause of action against the defendant
- Whether the plaintiffs have a right of easement over the suit land
- What remedies are available to the parties
Orders
- Suit dismissed without costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Evidence Act s.100
- Evidence Act s.102
- Roads Access Act s.8
- Roads Access Act s.2
- Roads Access Act s.3
- Civil Procedure Act s.27
- Constitution of Uganda article 26
Cases cited (2)
- Stewart Gawaya v KCCA and Another (Civil Suit No. 214 of 2021)
- Sengabi v Nakiyingi (Court of Appeal No. 59 of 2017)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.