Wameli & Co Advocates v The Administrators of the Late Sir Daudi Chwa II & Ors (Miscellaneous Application No 278 of 2015)

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 High Court sustained the first preliminary objection and dismissed the application with costs. The court held that it could not issue consequential orders directing the Registrar of Titles to issue certificates of title where no recovery of land had been ordered in the underlying Originating Summons and the extent of the estate had not been determined. Section 177 of the Registration of Titles Act requires recovery of land by proceeding before the court can direct cancellation or substitution of entries in the Register Book. The application was misdirected, misconceived, and an abuse of court process.

Outcome

Application dismissed on preliminary objection

Facts

Wameli & Co Advocates brought an application for consequential orders following the court's judgment in Originating Summons No. 09/2014 concerning the administration of the estate of the late H. H Sir Daudi Chwa II. The applicant sought orders directing the Registrar of Titles to issue certificates of title for land described as Kyaggwe Block 113 Plot 9 and Plots 457 & 458 at Nantabulirwa, first in the names of the deceased and then in the names of the administrators or Philip Mukembo Muniafu. The applicant also sought orders for surveys, mapping, amalgamation of land, and valuation of the estate. The respondents raised three preliminary objections: that the application sought orders under section 177 of the Registration of Titles Act without recovery of land; that the applicant's claim for remuneration required an ordinary suit under the Advocates Act; and that Wameli & Co Advocates lacked locus standi as the power of attorney was granted to Philip Mukembo personally. The original Originating Summons had issued declaratory and directive orders regarding the estate but did not determine any interest in land or the extent of the estate.

Issues

1. Whether consequential orders can be issued against the Registrar of Titles for issuance of certificates of title without recovery of land.
2. Whether the applicant's claim for remuneration as an advocate arising from a consent order requires an ordinary suit under section 67 of the Advocates Act.
3. Whether Wameli & Co Advocates has locus standi to bring the application where the power of attorney was granted to Philip Mukembo Muniafu personally and not to the firm.

Orders

• First preliminary objection sustained.
• Application dismissed with costs.
• Second and third preliminary objections rendered moot and relegated to academic purposes only.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 26(2)
• Judicature Act Cap. 13 s.33
• Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1, 2 & 3
• Registration of Titles Act s.177
• Advocates Act s.57
• Advocates Act s.67
• Government Proceedings Act s.10

Cases cited (2)

• Darlington Kampama v Registrar of Titles (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2013)
• J. B Byamugisha v NSSF (Miscellaneous Applications No. 25, 27 & 28 of 2011)

Cases citing this judgment (2)

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.

• Inter Africa Investments Limited v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause 53 of 2021)
• Vamee Industries Limited v Commissioner Land Registration and Another (Civil Appeal 345 of 2022)

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