KAMPALA, UGANDA: The High Court has ruled in favour of Businessman Hamis Kiggundu the five cases challenging the redevelopment of Nakivubo Stadium were based on illegality and did not have a reasonable cause of action.
In a ruling delivered by High Court Judge Civil Division Justice Musa Ssekaana, Court upheld the application that was filed in by Ham Enterprises (U) Ltd, Hamis Kiggundu and the Board f Trustees Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium Trust to dismiss consolidated suits against them over Nakivubo land.
The judge held that the cases are barred in law because they were since determined. “I agree with the applicant’s submission that the claims of the existence of a market without a licence presume that there were illegal and unlicensed activities on the suit land, which cannot form a basis of a valid and tenable cause of action,” Justice Ssekaana ruled.
The complaints had sued Ham Enterprises for evicting them from Nakivubo Park Yard Market without relocating them to another market facility, but the court observed that whereas the complaints alleged that the businessman had a duty to relocate them, the pleading did not provide anything to form a basis for their claim.
The judge also observed that one of the cases filed in 2019 in regard to the leases created out of the registered free-hold Nakivubo land are unlawful and invalid, thus hearing a similar case would amount to holding a case already determined.
The judge also said the claims raised in the cases filed in 2013 and 2017 did not have merit because the issues raised therein have since been determined by the same court.
Background
According to Suits HCCS No. 66/2017, HCCS No. 678/2017, HCCS No. 330/2013, HCCS No. 351/2018, HCCS No. 134/2017 and HCCS No. 822/2017, in 2017, the Board of Trustees Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium Trust granted Ham Enterprises leases on the suit land (Nakivubo land) for construction of lock-up shops and re-develop Nakivubo Stadium which is currently at an advanced stage.
Prior to leases, Nakivubo Stadium which sits on an adjacent plot had got dilapidated due to poor management and was condemned by the Federation of Uganda Football Association from hosting any sports-related activities yet sports-related activities were the principal source of income for the management and maintenance of the Stadium and the activities of the Board of Trustees. The stadium accumulated several taxes and utility debts and at some point, it was under receivership by Uganda Revenue Authority (URA).
The Board of Trustees in a bid to revamp the Stadium and redeem the suit land from encroachers, executed a Memorandum of Understanding with Ham Enterprises (U) LTD to redevelop the Stadium and Ham Enterprises Uganda limited to acquire the leases which forced the encroachers to vacate the land.
However, Katende Steven and 2 others, Mukwaya Jimmy and 245 others, . Lugya Moses and 85 others Kabeera Ezra and 4 others, Kakande Bernard and Mbidde Ahmed and 7 others, filed consolidated Suits against Ham and the other two parties.
In their suits, they challenged the validity of the leases created on the suit land, by the Board of Trustees in favour of the Ham Enterprises.
In their suits, they claimed that former market vendors were displaced or evicted from the suit land, allegedly without prior notice. In the suits, they claim that they were entitled to be relocate and faulted Ham for not relocating them. They claim compensatory damages for merchandise lost.
Do you have a story or an opinion to share? Email us on: dailyexpressug@gmail.com Or follow the Daily Express on X Platform or WhatsApp for the latest updates.
