Wakilii

Oryema v Uganda Muslem Supreme Council (Civil Suit 1238 of 1988)

High Court · [1990] UGHC 45 · 1990 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract, trespass, wrongful eviction and detinue
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with damages and costs.

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 that the defendant wrongfully evicted the plaintiff's family from rented premises while the tenancy agreement was still subsisting and unlawfully removed and detained the plaintiff's household effects. The plaintiff was entitled to compensation for the household goods (awarded at 3/5 of claimed value to account for depreciation), general damages for breach of contract, and general and aggravated damages for trespass and detinue. Interlocutory judgment previously entered in plaintiff's favour was upheld as defendant failed to enter appearance in time and attempted defence was filed without proper consent.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with damages and costs.

Facts

The plaintiff, a UNLA warrant officer attached to the National Council of Sports, was tenant of the defendant's flat No. 12, Plot 84/90, Nakivubo Road, Kampala from 1984, paying quarterly rent of Shs.57,100/-. He paid rent on 1 January 1986 for the quarter ending March 1986. When war broke out in Kampala in 1986, the plaintiff either went into hiding or was captured by NRA forces. During his absence and before the tenancy expired, the defendant evicted his family from the rented premises and removed his household effects. The defendant's Director of Housing, Mr. Zakaria Risasi, later informed the plaintiff that his family had been evicted and the flat allocated to another person because the defendant believed the plaintiff had run away or died. The defendant failed to enter appearance after being served with summons and failed to file a defence in time. The defendant's counsel obtained purported consent to file a late Written Statement of Defence from an unauthorised person after interlocutory judgment had already been entered. The defendant failed to attend the formal proof hearing despite being served with a hearing notice.

Issues

  1. Whether there was a tenancy agreement between the parties.
  2. Whether there was a breach of that agreement.
  3. Whether the defendant took the properties of the plaintiff.
  4. Whether the defendant is liable to the plaintiff for the loss of the properties.
  5. What remedy is the plaintiff entitled to?

Orders

  • Compensation for household effects taken from the rented flat awarded at Shs.2,454,000/-.
  • General damages in breach of contract combined with aggravated damages awarded at Shs.70,000/-.
  • General damages for trespass and detinue awarded at Shs.70,000/-.
  • Interest on all awarded sums at the court rate.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Breach of Tenancy Agreement — Wrongful Eviction Before Expiry
A landlord who evicts a tenant's family from rented premises before the expiry of a subsisting tenancy agreement commits a breach of contract, entitling the tenant to general damages for the wrongful eviction.
Trespass and Detinue — Unlawful Removal and Detention of Goods
Where a landlord unlawfully removes a tenant's household goods from rented premises and detains them without authorization, the tenant is entitled to general and aggravated damages for trespass and detinue.
Default of Appearance — Effect of Interlocutory Judgment
A defendant who fails to enter appearance after being served with summons and who fails to file a defence in time puts himself out of court and cannot be heard. Interlocutory judgment properly entered under Order 9 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules stands unless successfully set aside.
Late Filing of Defence — Consent Requirement
Consent to file a defence out of time must be obtained from an authorised representative of the opposing party. Consent obtained from counsel who no longer have instructions to act is null and void ab initio and of no legal consequence.
Assessment of Damages for Unlawfully Removed Goods — Depreciation
In assessing compensation for household goods unlawfully removed and detained, where the plaintiff provides evidence of prices for new goods but does not prove the actual condition or age of the removed goods, the court may award a discounted sum to account for depreciation and reasonable wear and use.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (3)

  • KIBIRIGE V. DOMINGO JANUARIO (1941) 1 EACA 87
  • SENGENOO vs ATTORNEY GENERAL [1972] EA
  • JOSEPH MUSUMBA VS HAJI M. KAGAWA & ANOR HCCS NO. 172 OF 1990

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Oryema v Uganda Muslem Supreme Council (Civil Suit 1238 of 1988) [1990] UGHC 45 (8 June 1990)
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.