[2009] UGCommC 41

[2009] UGCommC 41

The court held that the Registrar of Titles is a proper party to be sued where allegations of bad faith or fraud are made, and statutory protection under section 175 of the Registration of Titles Act does not apply to malafide acts. The suit was properly commenced by plaint, and the procedure adopted was appropriate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UGCommC 41
Parties
Plaintiff: Edward Kabugo Sentongo; Defendant: Bank of Baroda (U) Ltd.; Defendant: Robert Opio; Defendant: Registrar of Titles
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-CS 166 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
preliminary objections dismissed
Legal Topics
Registrar Liability, Cause of Action, Government Liability, Fraud in Land Registration, Originating Summons Procedure
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Registrar Liability Cause of Action Government Liability Fraud in Land Registration Originating Summons Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Kabugo Sentongo

Plaintiff

Bank of Baroda (U) Ltd.

Defendant

Robert Opio

Defendant

Registrar of Titles

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objections

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar of Titles is a proper party to be sued in this suit.
  2. 2 Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action against Mr. Opio and the Registrar of Titles.
  3. 3 Whether the suit should have been instituted against the Attorney General under the Government Proceedings Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Registrar of Titles is a proper party to be sued where allegations of bad faith or fraud are made, and statutory protection under section 175 of the Registration of Titles Act does not apply to malafide acts. The suit was properly commenced by plaint, and the procedure adopted was appropriate given the nature of the claims, which included damages and declaratory orders beyond the scope of section 182. The plaint disclosed a cause of action against the 2nd and 3rd defendants, as it alleged violation of the plaintiff's rights through fraudulent and non-bona fide acts resulting in loss and damage. The preliminary objections were therefore rejected and dismissed with...

Court Disposition

preliminary objections dismissed

Orders

  • The preliminary objections raised by the defendants are rejected and dismissed with costs.
  • The suit shall proceed on merit.