[2007] UGHC 32

[2007] UGHC 32

The court determined that the applicants had presented facts disclosing a serious complaint that merits investigation by way of judicial review. Although a previous judgment (HCCS No. 902 of 1990) found that unlawful settlers in the forest reserve were not entitled to compensation, it was not clear at this stage...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] UGHC 32
Parties
Applicant: Rutaryabusha Eliphaz; Applicant: Kahinda Uzieri; Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: The National Forestry Authority
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Misc. Cause No. 5 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Leave to apply for writs of mandamus and prohibition granted.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Mandamus, Prohibition, Forest Reserves, Eviction, Compensation
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Administrative Law Judicial Review Mandamus Prohibition Forest Reserves Eviction +1 more

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rutaryabusha Eliphaz

Applicant

Kahinda Uzieri

Applicant

The Attorney General

Respondent

The National Forestry Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established a serious complaint warranting judicial review.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are lawfully occupying the land or are within the boundaries of the forest reserve.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to apply for a writ of mandamus and prohibition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the applicants had presented facts disclosing a serious complaint that merits investigation by way of judicial review. Although a previous judgment (HCCS No. 902 of 1990) found that unlawful settlers in the forest reserve were not entitled to compensation, it was not clear at this stage whether the applicants fell within the same category as those plaintiffs. The determinable issue remains whether the applicants are within the boundaries of the forest reserve and thus lawful or unlawful occupants. On this basis, the court granted leave to apply for writs of mandamus and prohibition, as the threshold for leave in judicial review applications had been met. No...

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for writs of mandamus and prohibition granted.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicants to apply for a writ of mandamus and prohibition.
  • The application for judicial review must be filed within 14 days from the date of this ruling.