[2017] UGSC 77

[2017] UGSC 77

The court found that while tenants in common may sell their undivided shares, the physical transfer and exclusive possession of such shares require the consent and participation of all co-owners, as the land remains undivided. The Applicant's purchase from the 1st and 2nd Respondents was valid in respect of their shares, but the attempted physical demarcation and entry onto the land without the consent of the other tenants in common was unlawful. Furthermore, the purported sale of shares derived from the estate of the late Charles Runyunyuzi via a memorandum of understanding was invalid, as only a legal representative with letters of administration can deal with a deceased's estate. The...

Citation
[2017] UGSC 77
Parties
Applicant: Erisa Kakyomya; Respondent: Mr. Samwiri Sabiiti; Respondent: Mr. John Mwanguhya; Respondent: Mr. Solomon Kagoro; Respondent: The Registrar of Titles
Court
Supreme Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
23 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Vesting Order and Related Reliefs
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the 3rd respondent
Judges
Ojok, JSC
Legal Topics
Vesting Orders, Tenancy in Common, Transfer of Land, Registration of Titles, Partition of Land
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Vesting Orders Tenancy in Common Transfer of Land Registration of Titles Partition of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erisa Kakyomya

Applicant

Mr. Samwiri Sabiiti

Respondent

Mr. John Mwanguhya

Respondent

Mr. Solomon Kagoro

Respondent

The Registrar of Titles

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Vesting Order and Related Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st and 2nd Respondents validly sold their 10.1 hectares each to the Applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the 1st and 2nd Respondents validly sold part of their shares derived from the estate of Charles Runyunyuzi via a memorandum of understanding.
  3. 3 Whether the parties are entitled to the remedies and prayers sought, including a vesting order and cancellation of proprietorship.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while tenants in common may sell their undivided shares, the physical transfer and exclusive possession of such shares require the consent and participation of all co-owners, as the land remains undivided. The Applicant's purchase from the 1st and 2nd Respondents was valid in respect of their shares, but the attempted physical demarcation and entry onto the land without the consent of the other tenants in common was unlawful. Furthermore, the purported sale of shares derived from the estate of the late Charles Runyunyuzi via a memorandum of understanding was invalid, as only a legal representative with letters of administration can deal with a deceased's estate. The...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the 3rd respondent

Orders

  • The application is dismissed as premature and lacking merit.
  • Costs are awarded to the 3rd Respondent.