[2022] UGHCLD 172

[2022] UGHCLD 172

The court found that the original ruling contained clerical errors, specifically in the description of the suit land and the disposition of the application. The court clarified that the 1st to 3rd respondents' acts amounted to contempt of court orders, the suit land is correctly described as Block 249, plot 1330...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] UGHCLD 172
Parties
Applicant: Ssimba Richard; Respondent: Bamweyana Charles; Respondent: Nakayenga Bennah; Respondent: Ndagire Robinah; Respondent: Commissioner Land Registration
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application No. 711 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Correction/amendment of Judgment
Outcome
application granted with costs to applicant
Judges
Nkonge, J
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Caveat Removal, Clerical Error Correction, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Contempt of Court Caveat Removal Clerical Error Correction Costs Award

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ssimba Richard

Applicant

Bamweyana Charles

Respondent

Nakayenga Bennah

Respondent

Ndagire Robinah

Respondent

Commissioner Land Registration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Correction/amendment of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the respondents acted in contempt of court by lodging a caveat on the applicant's land.
  2. 2 Whether the caveat should be removed by the Commissioner Land Registration.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to compensation and costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the original ruling contained clerical errors, specifically in the description of the suit land and the disposition of the application. The court clarified that the 1st to 3rd respondents' acts amounted to contempt of court orders, the suit land is correctly described as Block 249, plot 1330 land at Bunga, and the application was granted with costs to the applicant. The court exercised its inherent powers under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to amend the ruling to reflect its true intention and to prevent abuse of court process. The applicant was awarded compensation and costs, and the caveat was ordered to be vacated.

Court Disposition

application granted with costs to applicant

Orders

  • The ruling is amended to state that the 1st to 3rd respondents' acts amounted to contempt of court orders.
  • The suit land is correctly described as Block 249, plot 1330 land at Bunga.