Wakilii

Tebandeke and Others v Mugerwa and Another (Miscellaneous Application 1529 of 2022)

High Court · [2022] UGHCLD 293 · 2022 Application Granted — Contempt Finding AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for contempt of court arising from Civil Suit No. 231 of 2011
Decision
Respondents found in contempt and ordered to pay a fine of UGX 50 million within one month or be committed to civil jail for six months

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 held that respondents who, after being lawfully evicted pursuant to a court order, re-entered the premises and attempted to evict the applicants were in contempt of court. A party aware of a court order cannot disobey it by claiming the order was invalid or improperly implemented — such grievances must be addressed through proper legal channels. The respondents were ordered to pay a fine of UGX 50 million jointly or face six months in civil jail.

Outcome

Respondents found in contempt and ordered to pay a fine of UGX 50 million within one month or be committed to civil jail for six months

Facts

The applicants, as administrators of the late David Katerega's estate, entered into a 15-year school management agreement with the respondents which expired in 2008. The respondents remained in management beyond the agreed period. The applicants filed Civil Suit No. 231 of 2011 for recovery of the school. On 21 May 2021, judgment was entered in favour of the applicants, with the court granting parties until 31 December 2021 to renegotiate terms, failing which the respondents would be evicted without notice. After parties failed to renegotiate, the respondents were evicted on 9 February 2022. Subsequently, the 1st respondent issued a notice expressing intention to return to the school, claiming the eviction was unprofessional and that he owned the land. The respondents then re-entered the school premises and attempted to evict the applicants. The applicants filed this contempt application.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents were in contempt of court.
  2. What remedies are available for contempt of court?

Orders

  • The application is allowed.
  • The respondents were found to be in contempt of court.
  • The respondents shall jointly pay a fine of UGX 50,000,000 within one month from the date of the ruling.
  • In default of payment, the respondents shall be committed to civil jail for a period of six months.
  • The respondents shall pay the costs of this application to the applicants.
  • The claim for punitive damages of UGX 600,000,000 is dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Contempt of Court — Elements Required for Finding of Contempt
For contempt of court to be established, it must be shown that there exists a lawful order, that the contemnor has knowledge of the said order, and that he or she has failed to comply with the same by disobeying the order.
Contempt of Court — Party Cannot Self-Judge Validity of Court Order
A party who knows of an order, whether null or valid, regular or irregular, cannot be permitted to disobey it by reason of what that party regards the order to be. It would be most dangerous to hold that parties or their advocates could themselves be judge whether an order was null or valid, whether regular or irregular. Parties not satisfied with court decisions must address their grievances through proper legal channels, not by taking the law into their own hands.
Contempt of Court — Applies to Final Orders as Well as Interlocutory Orders
All court orders, whether interlocutory or final, must be respected by all parties. Contempt of court can arise where a party disobeys a final judgment, not only where interlocutory orders such as temporary injunctions are breached.
Contempt of Court — Penalties for Deliberate Disobedience
Where disobedience of a court order is deliberate and willful rather than casual, accidental or unintentional, the effective administration of justice requires imposition of a penalty. The party in whose favour an order has been made is entitled to have it enforced.
Contempt of Court — Punitive Damages Not Awarded in Contempt Applications
Punitive damages should not be awarded in an application for contempt of court. The appropriate remedy is a fine or committal to civil jail.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (5)

  • Housing Finance Bank Ltd and Another v Edward Musisi (Court of Appeal Miscellaneous Application No. 158 of 2010)
  • Uganda Super League v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 73 of 2013)
  • Nsangiranabo v Col Kaka Baggenda and Another (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 671 of 2019)
  • Wildlife Lodges v County Council of Narok and Another [2005] EA 344
  • Re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No. 2) [1995] 1 All ER 135

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tebandeke_and_Others_v_Mugerwa_and_Another_(Miscellaneous_Application_1529_of_2022)_[2022]_UGHCLD_293_(18_August_2022)
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.