Wakilii

Nassanga Zulayika v Kasasira Hassan (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2023)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1288 · 2025 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Chief Magistrate's Court dismissal of eviction suit
Decision
Trial court judgment largely upheld; costs award to respondent set aside

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

Appeal partly allowed. High Court upheld trial court's dismissal of eviction suit, finding that the disputed road was an existing village path that was enlarged for community benefit, not a new road created on the appellant's kibanja. However, the court set aside the costs award to the respondent, recognising that the appellant suffered loss when her banana plants were cut without consent during the road enlargement, even though the enlargement served the public interest.

Outcome

Trial court judgment largely upheld; costs award to respondent set aside

Facts

The appellant sued the respondent in the Chief Magistrate's Court seeking an eviction order, permanent injunction, and special damages of UGX 672,000 for alleged trespass on her kibanja through creation of a road that destroyed part of her banana plantation. The respondent denied creating a new road, stating that local officials and residents resolved to enlarge an existing village path to its original size after discovering the appellant had planted crops in the road reserve. Local authorities persuaded the appellant to forfeit three feet from her kibanja for the road. The LC1 chairman testified that the road was an existing village path 6-8 feet wide used by both parties, and that banana plants were cut during general village cleaning supervised by the Resident District Commissioner and Kabaka. The trial court dismissed the appellant's suit with costs to the respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial magistrate erred in failing to consider the LC1 chairperson's testimony regarding unlawful creation of the road.
  2. Whether activities carried out in the village without LC1 authorisation were unlawful.
  3. Whether the trial magistrate correctly applied the law to evidence regarding replacement of an old road.
  4. Whether the trial magistrate erred in awarding costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • The appeal partly succeeds with no order as to costs.
  • The judgment and orders of the learned Trial Magistrate Grade One are largely upheld.
  • The award of costs in the Trial Magistrate's court is set aside.

Rules and key headnotes

Land & Property — Easements — Village Access Roads — Enlargement for Public Benefit
The enlargement of an existing village access road for community benefit does not constitute unlawful trespass where the road previously existed and served the general community, even if the enlargement encroaches on a portion of land claimed by an individual occupant.
Administrative Law — Local Government — LC1 Authority — Scope of Powers
The LC1 chairman does not have exclusive authority to authorise all activities conducted within a village. Other stakeholders including the Resident District Commissioner have authority over village activities, and community improvement activities such as cleaning and improving access routes do not require specific LC1 authorisation.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Award of Costs — Setting Aside
Where a party has already benefitted from the subject matter of the dispute and the opposing party has suffered loss without consent or compensation, a costs award in favour of the benefitting party may be set aside even where that party succeeded at trial.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Uganda Revenue Authority v Rwakasanje Azariu & 2 Ors (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2007)
  • Fr. Narsensio Begumisa & 3 Ors v Eric Kibebaga (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2002)
  • Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 08 of 1998)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nassanga Zulayika v Kasasira Hassan (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 1288 (3 November 2025)
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.