Tumwesigire v Tushemereirwe (Miscellaneous Application No. 140 of 2013)

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

Held that land acquired by a spouse during marriage but after the parties had separated does not constitute family land within Section 38A Land Act nor matrimonial property, and the non-owner spouse has no caveatable interest. A caveat lodged by a spouse on land which is neither family land nor matrimonial property must be removed.

Outcome

Caveat removed from certificate of title

Facts

The Applicant purchased land comprised in Block 306-310 Plot 1894 Busiro at Bira in February 2010. The Respondent, his legal wife whom he married in August 2008, lodged a caveat on the certificate of title claiming an interest as a legal wife and asserting that the land was family property intended for a residential home. The Applicant sought removal of the caveat, contending that the land does not constitute family land as the parties do not ordinarily reside on it or derive sustenance from it, and that it is not their matrimonial home. The Respondent claimed the land was purchased for the purpose of constructing a residential home for the family and that she lodged the caveat to protect her interests after the Applicant threatened to sell their matrimonial home in Sheema District. The Court found that the parties had separated and the land was acquired after separation.

Issues

1. Whether land comprised in Block 306-310 Plot 1894 constitutes family land within the definition of Section 38A Land Act as amended.
2. Whether the suit land is subject of the requirement of spousal consent.
3. What remedies are available to the Parties in the circumstances.

Orders

• The Caveat lodged by Miria Tushemereirwe on land comprised in Block 306-310 Plot 1894 be vacated.
• Costs are awarded to the Applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (5)

• Registration of Titles Act s.140(1)
• Land Act s.38A
• Land Act s.39
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Registration of Titles Act s.139

Cases cited (2)

• Rwabinumi v Bahimbisomwe (Civil Appeal No. 30 of 2007)
• Rwabinumi v Bahimbisomwe (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2009)

Cases citing this judgment (3)

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.

• Ntende Robert v Isabirye Iddi (Election Petition Appeal No. 74 of 2016)
• Gentex Enterprise Ltd v M & B Engineers Ltd (Civil Suit No. 74 of 2013)
• Rama Makuza v Nakamya & Ors (Ma No. 140 of 2013)

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