Wakilii

Registered Trustees of Mbarara Archdiocese and Tumuhairwe Pastori v Tumuhairwe Jackson (Civil Appeal 14 of 2021)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 359 · 2026 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from Magistrate Grade One's ruling finding appellants in contempt of court and awarding exemplary damages and fine
Decision
Appeal partly allowed; exemplary damages award set aside; fine reduced from UGX 5,000,000 to UGX 2,000,000

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 High Court partially allowed the appeal. Ground 1 was struck out for being too general and failing to specify which evidence the trial Magistrate allegedly failed to consider. On Ground 2, the court set aside the award of UGX 10,000,000 as exemplary damages because such damages were not pleaded and no factual basis was provided. The fine was reduced from UGX 5,000,000 to UGX 2,000,000 as the original amount was excessive given the nature of the contempt (cutting boundary marks) and the limited damage caused.

Outcome

Appeal partly allowed; exemplary damages award set aside; fine reduced from UGX 5,000,000 to UGX 2,000,000

Facts

The respondent obtained an injunction order on 7 October 2019 in Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2019. The appellants were among seven respondents named in that order. Subsequently, the respondent filed Miscellaneous Application No. 126 of 2019 alleging the appellants violated the injunction by cutting boundary marks. The Magistrate Grade One found the appellants in contempt, awarded the respondent exemplary damages of UGX 10,000,000, imposed a fine of UGX 5,000,000, and awarded costs. The appellants obtained leave to appeal vide Miscellaneous Application No. 044 of 2020 and filed this appeal challenging the contempt finding and the quantum of damages and fine.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial Magistrate erred in finding the appellants in contempt of court without properly considering the appellants' evidence on record.
  2. Whether the trial Magistrate erred in ordering the appellants to pay UGX 10,000,000 as exemplary damages and UGX 5,000,000 as a fine, which amounts were manifestly excessive.

Orders

  • Ground 1 of appeal struck out for contravening Order 43 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • The award of UGX 10,000,000 as exemplary damages is set aside.
  • The appellants shall pay a fine of UGX 2,000,000.
  • The respondent is awarded half of the costs in this appeal.
  • The respondent shall be paid costs in the lower court.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Grounds of Appeal — Formulation Requirements — Order 43 Rule 2
A memorandum of appeal must set forth concisely and under distinct heads the grounds of objection to the decree appealed from without argument or narrative, and the grounds shall be numbered consecutively. A ground of appeal that is too general, does not specify what evidence was allegedly not considered, and calls for speculation offends Order 43 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules and should be struck out.
Civil Procedure — Evidence — Annextures to Submissions — Improper Practice
The practice of counsel attaching annextures as a form of evidence to submissions is unprofessional and improper. Evidence and documents are tendered in court through a known formal process and not led to the attention of court by way of attaching annextures to submissions.
Damages & Quantum — Aggravated Damages — Pleading Requirements
A plaintiff is required to plead the type of damages sought and the factual basis on which the claim is based. Where a claimant seeks aggravated damages, he must include in the particulars of claim a statement to that effect and the grounds for claiming such damages. An award of aggravated damages cannot be sustained where such damages were not pleaded and no factual basis was provided.
Damages & Quantum — Appellate Interference — Principles
An appellate court will only interfere with an award of damages if it was based on a wrong principle or if the amount awarded is so high or so low as to make it an entirely erroneous estimate of damages to which the plaintiff was entitled.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Service of Orders — Service on Counsel
Service of a court order on the lawyer representing a party is effective service on that party. Where an injunction order is served on the lawyer representing all respondents, each respondent is deemed to have been served.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (16)

  • Selle & Another v Associated Motor Boat Co Ltd & Others [1968] EA 123
  • Kifamute Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1992)
  • Zeresi Tereza v Paul Bwakashenyi & Another (High Court Civil Appeal No. 92 of 2010)
  • D.C Wabwire Anthony v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2009)
  • Kwelaondeza Juliet v Mwesigwa William (Civil Appeal No. 93 of 2023)
  • Sietco v Noble Builders (U) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 014 of 2008)
  • Tumuheirwe Fred Muhumuza v Muhwezi Tim Katugugu & Another (Election Appeal No. 01 of 2021)
  • Betwen U Ltd & Anor Vs Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited & Anor (Supreme Court)
  • National Insurance Corporation v Pelican Air Services (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2007)
  • Katumba Byaruhanga v Edward Kyewalabye Musoke (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 002 of 1999)
  • Attorney General v Florence Baliraine (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2003)
  • Crown Beverage Ltd v Sendi Edward (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 01 of 2015)
  • UK Law Commissioner's Report on Aggravated, exemplary and restitutionary Damages (1997)
  • Rookes V Barnard
  • Halsbury's Laws of England Defamation [Volume 92 (2021)]
  • Tullow International Ltd v Vivaenergy Uganda Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Registered Trustees of Mbarara Archdiocese and Tumuhairwe Pastori v Tumuhairwe Jackson (Civil Appeal 14 of 2021) [2026] UGHC 359 (16 March 2026)
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.