Wakilii

Musajjalumbwa v Hon. Paulo Kawanga Ssemogerere and Another (Civil Suit 957 of 1993)

High Court · [1997] UGHC 34 · 1997 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for damages arising from alleged trespass and unlawful excavation of murram from plaintiff's registered land
Decision
Suit dismissed with costs to defendants

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 the plaintiff's claim for damages arising from alleged trespass and excavation of murram from his registered land. The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove he was in actual possession of the land at the time of the alleged trespass, as possession rested with his brother who cultivated it. Further, the plaintiff did not establish on a balance of probabilities that the defendants or their agents excavated the murram, as evidence suggested excavation may have been done by volunteers without the committee's knowledge or approval.

Outcome

Suit dismissed with costs to defendants

Facts

The plaintiff, registered proprietor of land at Nalumenye, Busiro County, Mpigi District (Block 347 Plot 79), alleged that in June 1993 the defendants, chairperson and secretary of the committee organising the Kabaka of Buganda's coronation, instructed workers repairing roads to the coronation site at Nagalabi-Buddo to excavate murram from his land without consent. The plaintiff, who resided in Mbale, was informed by his brother Sekamwa (who cultivated the land) that murram had been excavated. A valuation report assessed the murram removed at approximately 420 cubic metres valued at Shs. 5,049,000. The defendants denied liability, claiming murram was freely and voluntarily donated, and that the plaintiff was not in possession. Defence evidence indicated the area had been a murram quarry since 1958 and that a letter requesting murram had been written following an offer from Sekamwa, though Sekamwa denied making such offer.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the land comprised in Block 347 Plot 79.
  2. Whether murram was actually excavated from the plaintiff's land.
  3. Whether the plaintiff consented to the extraction of murram.
  4. Whether the defendants are liable for the alleged trespass and excavation.
  5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any remedy.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's suit dismissed.
  • Plaintiff to pay costs of the suit to the First and Second Defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass to Land — Standing — Requirement of Actual Possession
In order to bring an action in trespass to land, the person bringing the action must be in actual possession of the land, as trespass is an interference with possession and not ownership; the person who is in physical control of the land is the one entitled to sue for trespass.
Burden of Proof — Identification of Tortfeasor
A plaintiff claiming damages for trespass must establish on a balance of probabilities the identity of the persons who committed the alleged trespass; failure to prove that the acts complained of were committed by the defendants or persons employed by them is fatal to the claim.
Vicarious Liability — Volunteers Not Employees
Where acts of trespass are committed by volunteers acting on their own initiative rather than by persons employed or instructed by the defendants, the volunteers are personally liable for the torts committed and the defendants cannot be held vicariously liable.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Musajjalumbwa v Hon. Paulo Kawanga Ssemogerere and Another (Civil Suit 957 of 1993) [1997] UGHC 34 (11 February 1997)
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.