Wakilii

Samsudin v Ssentumbwe (Civil Suit No.343 of 2002)

High Court · [2004] UGHC 20 · 2004 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for compensation for demolished structures
Decision
Plaintiff awarded compensation totalling UGX 3,900,000 with 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

Where a defendant demolishes part of a building and structures that encroached onto his newly acquired plot, the plaintiff kibanja holder is entitled to compensation assessed by reference to expert valuation evidence. The court awarded compensation for the demolished portion of the house, pit latrine, lost land usufruct value, and disturbance allowance, totalling UGX 3.9 million.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded compensation totalling UGX 3,900,000 with costs

Facts

The plaintiff held a kibanja interest in land comprised in Block 12 Plot 609 Rubaga Road, Kampala. A residential building and pit latrine on her plot encroached approximately 5 metres onto the adjacent Plot 608. The defendant purchased Plot 608 from a mortgagee and proceeded to develop it. In clearing the land, the defendant demolished the encroaching portion of the plaintiff's building and pit latrine. The defendant offered the plaintiff UGX 550,000 in compensation, which she rejected, claiming the demolished structures were valued at over UGX 9 million. The plaintiff brought suit for compensation. Each party called expert valuation surveyors. The plaintiff's valuer assessed compensation at UGX 9.3 million including disturbance. The defendant's valuer assessed the structures at UGX 1.4 million but conceded he did not measure the plot, was unaware part of the property was on Plot 609, did not provide for disturbance allowance, and did not assess the effect of the demolition.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to compensation for structures demolished by the defendant.
  2. What was the appropriate quantum of compensation for the demolished building, pit latrine, and loss of land use.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendant for UGX 3,900,000.
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Compensation — Demolition of Encroaching Structures — Assessment of Quantum
Where a landowner demolishes structures belonging to a kibanja holder that encroach onto his plot, compensation must be assessed by reference to the value of the demolished structures before demolition, the effect of demolition on remaining structures, loss of land usufruct value, and a disturbance allowance.
Expert Evidence — Valuation — Weight to be Attached
In assessing compensation, the court will prefer expert valuation evidence that is specific on the purpose of the valuation, presents the state of the property before demolition, accounts for the effect of demolition, and includes appropriate allowances such as disturbance, over evidence from a valuer who did not measure the property, was unaware of key facts, and omitted material elements from the assessment.
Disturbance Allowance — Demolition of Structures
A plaintiff whose structures are demolished and who loses use of land is entitled to a disturbance allowance to compensate for the inconvenience and disruption caused by the loss.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Samsudin v Ssentumbwe (Civil Suit No.343 of 2002) [2004] UGHC 20 (5 July 2004)
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.