Wakilii

Okello Terence, Toga Benson & Elank Bosco v Agec Peter (Miscellaneous Application 31 of 2020)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 10 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of High Court appellate decision arising from land appeal
Decision
Review application granted; trial court decree set aside; 1st Applicant's lease to subsist until expiration; taxation proceedings stayed

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 3 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 3 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Citations steady — 4 citing cases on record, 3 in the most recent three data years. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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

Court allowed review application where appellate judgment contained errors on face of record. First Applicant held valid 49-year lease granted in 1993. Trial court decree ordering removal of structures and permanent injunction was set aside as it conflicted with subsisting lease. Appellate court's finding that appeal was disallowed while simultaneously ordering that lease continue to run was internally contradictory. Costs of appeal and trial awarded to Applicants.

Outcome

Review application granted; trial court decree set aside; 1st Applicant's lease to subsist until expiration; taxation proceedings stayed

Facts

Applicants instituted land claim No. 05 of 2011 seeking declaration as lawful owners of land at Awang cell measuring 200 acres plus a commercial plot in Apac town. Trial magistrate found in favour of Respondent and ordered removal of structures. Applicants appealed. Appellate court found Respondent was customary owner but noted 1st Applicant held valid lease granted in 1993 for 49 years. Appellate judgment stated appeal was disallowed but also ordered lease to continue until expiration. Applicants applied for review, alleging errors on face of record including contradictory findings and incorrect costs award. Respondent filed bill of costs prompting this application. Applicants relied on transcribed court recording showing costs were awarded to them, not Respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether there are grounds for court to grant an order of review.

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 009 of 2016 is reviewed.
  • The orders and decree under Civil Suit No. 005 of 2011 are set aside.
  • The 1st Applicant's lease shall subsist until its expiration.
  • The Taxation proceeding in Land Appeal No. 009 of 2016 are stayed.
  • Costs of the Appeal and those of the court below are awarded to the Applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Review of Judgments — Error Apparent on Face of Record
A court may review its own judgment where there is an error apparent on the face of the record under section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and it is the duty of the court which passed the judgment to correct any grave errors committed by it to prevent miscarriage of justice.
Civil Procedure — Review — Internal Contradictions in Judgment
Where an appellate judgment contains internally contradictory findings—disallowing an appeal while simultaneously ordering that a party's lease shall continue to run contrary to the trial court's decree—such contradiction constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review.
Land & Property — Leasehold Interests — Protection of Valid Leases
Where a leaseholder holds a valid lease granted by competent authority and the lease has not been challenged for fraud, trial court orders requiring removal of structures and granting permanent injunction against the lessee cannot stand as they conflict with the subsisting lease interest.
Land & Property — Leasehold — Coexistence with Customary Ownership
A finding that the respondent is the customary owner of land does not extinguish a validly granted lease over the same land; the lease continues to subsist until its expiration notwithstanding customary ownership claims.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (4)

  • Abdul Jafa Devij v Ali RMS Devij [1958] EZ 558
  • Re Nakuvubo Chemist (U) Ltd (1979) HCB 12
  • Mohamed Allibhai v W.E Bukenya Mukasa and Departed Asians Property Custodian Board (Civil Appeal No. 56 of 1996)
  • Ladak Abdallah Mohammed Hussein v Isingoma Kakiiza (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1995)

Cases citing this judgment (3)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Okello Terence, Toga Benson & Elank Bosco v Agec Peter (Miscellaneous Application 31 of 2020) [2024] UGHC 10 (17 January 2024)
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.