[2008] UGHC 91

[2008] UGHC 91

The court found that both parties raised serious triable issues regarding ownership and alleged trespass over the suit land. The applicant demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success and a likelihood of suffering irreparable harm if the land was alienated before the main suit's determination. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] UGHC 91
Parties
Applicant: Hassan Mitchel through his attorney Harriet Aber; Respondent: Major General Oketa Julius
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Suit No. 24 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
temporary injunction granted
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunctions, Land Ownership Disputes, Trespass, Status Quo Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Temporary Injunctions Land Ownership Disputes Trespass Status Quo Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hassan Mitchel through his attorney Harriet Aber

Applicant

Major General Oketa Julius

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction

  1. 1 Whether or not the disputants, or one of them, owns the alleged suit land or part of it.
  2. 2 Whether there is trespass by one disputant on the land of the other and vice-versa.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both parties raised serious triable issues regarding ownership and alleged trespass over the suit land. The applicant demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success and a likelihood of suffering irreparable harm if the land was alienated before the main suit's determination. The court held that maintaining the status quo by granting a temporary injunction would prevent irreversible harm and unnecessary expenditure by either party, pending the outcome of the main suit. The injunction was limited to the 3,500 acres claimed by the applicant, as clearly demarcated in the survey map, and not the larger area claimed by the respondent. The court exercised its...

Court Disposition

temporary injunction granted

Orders

  • A temporary injunction is granted restraining the respondent and anyone acting through him from trespassing, developing, leasing, alienating, or selling the suit land measuring 3,500 acres at Omee 1, Paliyec Parish, Amuru Sub-county, Kilak County, Amuru District, as set out in the survey map dated 12/06/2008.
  • The interim injunction issued on 25/06/2008 is incorporated into this order and applies only to the 3,500 acres described.