[2023] UGHCLD 47

[2023] UGHCLD 47

The court found that KCCA, by its own admissions in pleadings and through counsel, acknowledged that the Plaintiffs were bibanja holders on the suit land and that its landfill activities caused private nuisance, depriving the Plaintiffs of quiet enjoyment of their tenancies. Judgment on admission was accordingly...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] UGHCLD 47
Parties
Plaintiff: Yiga Francis; Plaintiff: Zizinga Geofrey; Plaintiff: Ssesanga Godfrey; Plaintiff: Nakimera Rose; Plaintiff: Noeline Namubiru; Plaintiff: Komuhangi Elizabeth; Plaintiff: Semuyaba Samuel; Plaintiff: Nanteza Hanifa; Defendant: Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA)
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCCS 39 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Final Judgment After Judgment on Admission and Quantum Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiffs; compensation awarded as per valuation report; interest and costs granted.
Judges
Basaza, J
Legal Topics
Compensation for Bibanja Holders, Private Nuisance, Valuation of Land, Disturbance Allowance
Source Language
en
Land and Property Tort Law Compensation for Bibanja Holders Private Nuisance Valuation of Land Disturbance Allowance

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yiga Francis

Plaintiff

Zizinga Geofrey

Plaintiff

Ssesanga Godfrey

Plaintiff

Nakimera Rose

Plaintiff

Noeline Namubiru

Plaintiff

Komuhangi Elizabeth

Plaintiff

Semuyaba Samuel

Plaintiff

Nanteza Hanifa

Plaintiff

Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Final Judgment After Judgment on Admission and Quantum Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to compensation for loss of quiet enjoyment of their bibanja due to KCCA's landfill activities.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiffs suffered private nuisance as a result of the Defendant's actions.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum of compensation due to the Plaintiffs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that KCCA, by its own admissions in pleadings and through counsel, acknowledged that the Plaintiffs were bibanja holders on the suit land and that its landfill activities caused private nuisance, depriving the Plaintiffs of quiet enjoyment of their tenancies. Judgment on admission was accordingly entered. The only remaining issue was the quantum of compensation, which was resolved by reference to the agreed KCCA valuation report, approved by the Chief Government Valuer. The court held that the Plaintiffs are entitled to the specific compensation amounts set out in the report, to be paid within thirty days, with interest at 17% per annum until payment in full. No additional...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiffs; compensation awarded as per valuation report; interest and costs granted.

Orders

  • Declaration that KCCA's landfill caused private nuisance and denied Plaintiffs quiet enjoyment of their bibanja.
  • Plaintiffs are entitled to compensation by KCCA for their respective bibanja portions as set out in the KCCA valuation report dated August 2022.