Okwenje v Monday (Miscellaneous Application 3608 of 2023)

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.

Holding

Held: the applicant, though not a party to the original suit, suffered a legal grievance and had locus to apply for review. The judgment in Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016 declaring the respondent owner of land on the shores of Lake Victoria was erroneous in law. The disputed land is a lake shore within 100 metres of Lake Victoria and is held by Entebbe Municipal Council in trust for all Ugandans under the Constitution and environmental laws. No individual may claim ownership or a kibanja on a lake shore. Application allowed; previous judgment reviewed and set aside.

Outcome

Application for review allowed; previous judgment in Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016 reviewed and set aside; declarations made affirming Government ownership of lake shore land

Facts

The applicant owns Plot 6 Kintu Road along Lake Victoria in Entebbe. The respondent owns Plot 4, neighbouring Plot 6. The respondent claimed ownership of a kibanja on a small patch of land between the two plots and the lake shore, producing a 1992 purchase agreement. In 2007 Entebbe Municipal Council permitted him to use the land for a bar and restaurant. In Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016, the court declared the respondent owner of the kibanja. The applicant, not a party to that suit, held a NEMA lake shore user permit (2016–2021) for a beach facility. Entebbe Municipal Council subsequently confirmed that the disputed land falls within a protected green belt and that it does not recognise any bibanja holders on lake shores. The applicant applied to review the 2023 judgment, arguing she suffered a legal grievance as the land is public land under Government and NEMA control, and no individual can own a lake shore.

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is an aggrieved person within the meaning of the law entitled to apply for review of a judgment in proceedings to which she was not a party.
2. Whether the application meets the criteria for review of the judgment and orders in High Court Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016.
3. Whether the land between Plot 4 and Plot 6 Kintu Road and Lake Victoria is a protected lake shore held in trust by Government.
4. Whether the respondent has a valid kibanja interest in land on a lake shore.

Orders

• The judgment of this court in High Court Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016 delivered on 9 March 2023 is reviewed and the orders are set aside.
• Declaration that the applicant, respondent and Denis Abitekaniza do not own the land between Plot 4 and Plot 6 Kintu Road, Entebbe Municipality and Lake Victoria, unless permitted by Entebbe Municipal Council and NEMA to temporarily use the land under specified terms and conditions.
• Declaration that the land between Plot 4 and Plot 6 Kintu Road, Entebbe Municipality and Lake Victoria is held by the Government through Entebbe Municipal Council in trust for the common good of all citizens of Uganda.
• Declaration that it is prohibited by law for Entebbe Municipal Council to lease out or otherwise alienate the land opposite Plot 4 and Plot 6 Kintu Road because it is a lake shore.
• No costs awarded to the plaintiff in Civil Suit No. 2904 of 2016.
• Each party to bear its own costs of this application and all related applications including Misc. Applications No. 91 and 92 of 2024.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (30)

• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 8A(1)
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 26
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 237(1)
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 237(2)(b)
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 242
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Art. 245
• Constitution of Uganda (1995) Fifth Schedule Art. 178
• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.33
• Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.82(a)
• Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.82
• Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 rule 1
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 rule 3
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 46 rule 1
• Land Act Cap 227 s.44
• Land Act Cap 227 s.70
• Land Act s.23
• Land Act s.43
• National Environment Act Cap 153 s.34
• National Environment Act Cap 153 s.35
• National Environment Act (2019) s.52
• National Environment Act (2019) s.53
• National Environment Act (2019) s.182
• National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations SI 3/2000 Reg. 2
• National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations SI 3/2000 Reg. 21
• National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations SI 3/2000 Reg. 23
• Local Governments Act Cap 243 Second Schedule Part 2 para 15
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community (2000) Art. 111(2)(c)
• Protocol on Environment and Natural Resources Management (1999) Art. 13(3)(vii)
• Protocol for Sustainable Development of Lake Victoria Basin (2003) Art. 6

Cases cited (8)

• Mubukuke v UEB (Miscellaneous Application No. 98 of 2005)
• Allibhai v Mukasa and Departed Asians Property Custodian Board (Civil Appeal No. 56 of 1996)
• Yusufu v Nokrach (1971) EA 104
• In Re Nakivubo Chemists (U) Ltd (1971) HCB 12
• Hussein v Kakiiza (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1995)
• Uganda v Kwoyelo (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2012)
• Nyakaana v National Environment Management Authority (Constitutional Appeal No. 5 of 2011)
• Nyakairu v Nyakairu (Civil Suit No. 72 of 2006)

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