Registered Trustees of Kampala Archdiocese & Anor v Asaba (Civil Appeal No. 83 of 2011)

Observed later treatment

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

The Court of Appeal held that a court ordering attachment and sale in execution of a decree is not obliged to obtain the lessor's consent, since the consent covenant in the lease binds only lessee and lessor. Accordingly ground one failed. However, re-evaluating the evidence, the Court found glaring discrepancies in the dates, prices, purchasers and manner of sale, showing that the respondent personally participated in fraudulent transactions and could not be a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The appeal was allowed, the High Court judgment and the sale set aside, the title reverted to the second appellant, and the respondent was ordered to vacate the land.

Outcome

Appeal allowed on grounds three and four; sale set aside and title reverted to the second appellant, respondent ordered to vacate

Facts

The first appellant, the registered freehold owner of Plot 1802 Block 15 at Nsambya, leased the land to the second appellant, Grace Kagaiga, for 49 years, subject to a covenant barring assignment without the lessor's written consent. The second appellant was sued by Emmanuel Kaweesa and an ex parte judgment was entered against her, following which the suit land was attached and sold in execution. The property was purportedly sold by public auction. Court records showed conflicting transactions: a sale agreement with the court bailiff dated 26 February 2000 for UGX 23,000,000; a bailiff's return stating the highest bidders were Joyce Lamwaka, Grace Asaba and Harriet Asaba for UGX 25,000,000; a transfer from those three to Grace Asaba dated 30 May 2000 for UGX 13,000,000; and a further payment by Grace Asaba on 7 June 2000. The property had been advertised for sale on 11 March 2000, yet was said to have been sold earlier on 26 February 2000. The respondent obtained registration in her names without the first appellant's consent.

Issues

1. Whether the court executing a decree was obliged to seek the lessor's consent before transferring a leasehold in execution.
2. Whether the transfer of the suit land to the respondent required the consent of the first appellant under the lease agreement.
3. Whether the respondent was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of fraud.
4. Whether the trial judge properly evaluated the evidence on record.

Orders

• The judgment and decree of the High Court dated 30/11/2009 are set aside.
• The sale of the land comprised in Leasehold Register Volume 2558 Folio 12 Plot 1802 is set aside.
• The property and title of Leasehold Register Volume 2558 Folio 12 Plot 1802 reverts to Grace Kagaiga, the second appellant, and the Commissioner for Land Registration is directed to register it in her names.
• The respondent is to vacate the suit land and hand it over to the appellants.
• Costs in this Court and in the High Court are awarded to the appellants.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (4)

• Civil Procedure Act s.38(a)
• Registration of Titles Act s.105
• Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.62
• Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.78(2)(c)

Cases cited (5)

• Pandya v R (1957) EA 336
• Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
• Bogere Moses and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
• Father Nanensio Begumisa and 3 Others v Eric Tiberaga (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2002)
• Coghlan v Cumberland (1898) 1 Ch 704

Cases citing this judgment (1)

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.

• Grace Asaba v Grace Kagaiga [2017] UGSC 68

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