Wakilii

Nalongo Estates Limited v Kampala Capital City Authority and Another (Miscellaneous Application 309 of 2023)

High Court · [2023] UGHCLD 243 · 2023 Application Granted — Contempt Established AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enforcement of court orders from Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020, seeking declarations of non-compliance and orders for joint survey and proper valuation
Decision
Application granted. Court declared respondents in violation of previous orders, set aside impugned valuation, awarded punitive damages and costs to applicant, and ordered fresh joint survey and proper valuation by Chief Government Valuer.

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 court found both respondents in violation of its orders issued in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020. The 1st respondent failed to extend the applicant's leases, and the 2nd respondent unilaterally conducted a survey and valuation without joint participation by the applicant, contrary to court directives requiring a joint survey. The valuation by the 2nd respondent's consultants, which excluded land value and was based on an expired lease, was set aside. The court awarded punitive damages against both respondents and ordered fresh joint survey and proper valuation.

Outcome

Application granted. Court declared respondents in violation of previous orders, set aside impugned valuation, awarded punitive damages and costs to applicant, and ordered fresh joint survey and proper valuation by Chief Government Valuer.

Facts

Nalongo Estates Limited (applicant) held leases over land in Kampala affected by the Kampala Flyover project. In June 2021, the court in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020 ordered: (a) immediate extension of the applicant's lease for LRV 4211 Folio 15 plot 5 Park Lane; (b) a joint survey to be conducted between the applicant and UNRA to determine the land area needed for the project; (c) proper valuation of land and developments; and (d) renewal of leases for the residue land after the survey. The 1st respondent (KCCA) refused to extend the leases, and the 2nd respondent (UNRA) conducted a unilateral survey in 2017 and commissioned a valuation by M/s Nippon Koei in December 2022 that assessed only developments (UGX 3.73 billion) and excluded land value, claiming the applicant held no valid lease. The applicant filed this application, asserting both respondents violated court orders by failing to conduct a joint survey and proper valuation. The applicant engaged its own surveyors and valuers, who returned a significantly higher valuation of approximately UGX 18.87 billion.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents complied with the orders of the court issued in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020.
  2. Whether the 1st respondent was obliged to extend the applicant's leases and grant new leases as ordered by court.
  3. Whether the 2nd respondent was required to conduct a joint survey with the applicant before determining the area needed for the Kampala Flyover project.
  4. Whether the valuation assessment conducted by the 2nd respondent's consultants without involving the applicant contravened court orders.
  5. Whether the respondents were in contempt of court.

Orders

  • The 1st respondent's obligation to renew the applicant's lease or issue lease titles depends entirely on this court's ruling in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020, not the Memorandum of Understanding.
  • By refusing to extend the applicant's lease for land comprised in LRV 4211 Folio 15 plot 5 Park Lane, LRV 4211 Folio 14 Plot 96A-100A Kitante Road, and to grant a lease for LRV 2825 Folio 1 plot 34E-38E Jinja Road, the 1st respondent defied the court orders issued in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020.
  • The 2nd respondent's refusal to conduct a joint survey on the land to determine the area affected by the Kampala Flyover project is in violation of this court's orders.
  • The 2nd respondent's valuation assessment issued on 9 December 2022 by its project consultants M/s Nippon Koei contravened the court orders in Originating Summons No. 005 of 2020.
  • The 2nd respondent was not the entity mandated to conduct a valuation of the land. Its project consultants valued only the developments and excluded the value of the land. The assessment is set aside.
  • The applicant is awarded UGX 70,000,000 against the 1st respondent and UGX 30,000,000 as punitive damages against the 2nd respondent for their violation of the court's orders.
  • Interest of 15% per annum is awarded to the applicant from the date of delivery of this ruling until payment in full.
  • The parties are directed to conduct a joint survey and proper valuation on the applicant's land and developments in accordance with the orders in Originating Summons No. 0005 of 2020.
  • The surveyor is to be appointed by the court, and the exercise is to be carried out in the presence of all affected parties.
  • A proper valuation is to be made by the office of the Chief Government Valuer in respect of both the land and the developments, based on the applicant holding a full-term lease since 2017.
  • The survey exercise is to be conducted within 30 days from the date of delivery of this ruling. Costs of the independent survey are to be met jointly by the parties.
  • The results from the independent survey shall be binding on all parties.
  • The respondents shall meet the costs of the valuation.
  • The 1st respondent shall issue the lease to the applicant for the residue of the surveyed portion within thirty days after receiving the survey report.
  • Costs of the application to be met by the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Execution of Court Orders — Contempt of Court — Duty to Comply with Undischarged Orders
A party who fails to comply with a court order without proper explanation does so at his or her own peril. Whether unclear, null or irregular, a party cannot afford or be permitted to disobey an order for as long as it remains undischarged. A party cannot be permitted to disobey an order by reason of what the party regards the order to be. The order must be complied with in totality and in all circumstances by the party concerned, subject to the party's right to challenge the order.
Land Acquisition — Joint Survey — Requirement of Participation by Affected Parties
Where a court orders a joint survey to determine the area of land required for a government project, the implementing agency is bound to conduct the survey in the presence of the landowner or their representatives. Failure to involve affected parties in the survey violates both the Land Acquisition Act and the court's orders, and any assessment based on a unilateral survey is invalid.
Land Acquisition — Valuation — Duty of Chief Government Valuer
For purposes of computing fair and adequate compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, the valuation must be conducted by the office of the Chief Government Valuer, not by the project consultants of the implementing agency. A valuation conducted by project consultants in place of the Chief Government Valuer contravenes statutory procedure and is liable to be set aside.
Valuation — Compensation for Land and Developments — Full Term Leases
Where a lessee has been granted a full-term lease by the lessor and the delay in formal registration of the lease is not attributable to the lessee, compensation for land acquisition must be assessed on the basis of the full-term lease interest, not an expired lease. The lessee's status as a sitting and waiting tenant holding a full-term interest must be taken into account in computing compensation.
Punitive Damages — Contempt and Violation of Court Orders
Where a party to litigation deliberately disregards court orders and frustrates their execution, the court may award punitive damages against that party as a sanction for their violation of the court's authority. The award serves to vindicate the court's orders and compensate the injured party for losses caused by non-compliance.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (4)

  • Makula International Ltd v H.E Cardinal Nsubuga and Another (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
  • Megha Industries Ltd v Conform Uganda Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 21 of 2014)
  • Attorney General v Kiruhura District Local Government and 2 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 35 of 2012)
  • Mutambo Wepukhulu v Wasswa Balunywa and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 276 of 2012)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nalongo_Estates_Limited_v_Kampala_Capital_City_Authority_and_Another_(Miscellaneous_Application_309_of_2023)_[2023]_UGHCLD_243_(14_August_2023)
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.