Namale Shamim v Nataliya Nabbimba (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 944 of 2025)
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 the respondent lacked locus standi to bring the temporary injunction application because the name on the certificate of title (Natasha Nabbimba) differed from the applicant's name (Nataliya Nabbimba), and no evidence of formal name change was provided. The Assistant Registrar erred in failing to address this discrepancy. The appeal was allowed and the temporary injunction set aside.
Outcome
Temporary injunction set aside; matter remitted to main suit for determination of parties' rights.
Facts
The respondent filed Civil Suit No. 173 of 2025 against the appellant for trespass, vacant possession and general damages concerning land comprised in Kyadondo Block 249 Plot 668 at Bunga. The respondent subsequently filed Miscellaneous Application No. 424 of 2025 seeking a temporary injunction, which the Assistant Registrar granted on 15 April 2025. The certificate of title showed the land registered in the names of Nabbimba Samson Kabbalu, Samson Nabbimba and Natasha Nabbimba. The respondent's name in the application was Nataliya Nabbimba. The respondent's marriage certificate showed her maiden name as Polidova Natalia (a Ukrainian citizen) who married Samson Nabbimba. The respondent explained that Natasha is a diminutive of Nataliya used outside Russia. The appellant raised the name discrepancy as a preliminary objection, which the Assistant Registrar did not address in his ruling.
Issues
- Whether the learned Assistant Registrar erred in law and fact when he failed to address the unsubstantiated discrepancies in the names of the respondent.
- Whether the respondent had locus standi to bring the application for temporary injunction given the name discrepancies between the applicant and the registered proprietor on the certificate of title.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- The ruling and orders of the Assistant Registrar in Miscellaneous Application No. 424 of 2025 granting a temporary injunction to the respondent against the appellant is hereby set aside.
- Costs of this appeal and Miscellaneous Application No. 424 of 2025 shall follow the outcome of the main suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (3)
- Fr Narsensio Begumisa and Others v Eric Tibebaga (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2002)
- Dima Dominic Poro v Inyani Godfrey (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2016)
- Kithende Appolonia and 2 Others v Eleanor Wismer (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2010)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.