Supreme Court orders errant Kasasa family members to pay costs to Muteesa II family in Mutungo land dispute

Kampala, Uganda: The Supreme Court of Uganda has ordered Moses Kanyike Kasasa and Anwar Ssempiira Kasasa to pay legal costs to the Attorney General, the family of Edward Muteesa II, and administrators of the estate of the late Muhammad Buwule Kasasa, following the withdrawal of their application challenging a settlement agreement over disputed land in Mutungo.

The two applicants, represented by Kiiza & Co Advocates alongside former Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana of Mwesigwa Rukutana & Co. Advocates, had petitioned the court seeking an injunction to block the implementation of a negotiated settlement between the Kasasa estate administrators and the Muteesa II family.

The contested settlement relates to ownership and administration of prime land in Mutungo, which has been at the centre of a long-running legal dispute between the two families.

However, in a sudden development, the applicants moved to withdraw their case before the Supreme Court, requesting that each party bears its own costs. This request was strongly opposed by the respondents, who argued that they had already incurred substantial legal expenses defending what they termed a baseless application.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court rejected the request to waive costs, ruling that withdrawal of the application does not absolve parties from financial liability where other parties have incurred expenses.

The court subsequently ordered Moses Kanyike Kasasa and Anwar Ssempiira Kasasa to meet the legal costs of the Attorney General, the Muteesa II family, and the estate administrators.

The dispute stems from a protracted legal battle involving the estate of Dr Buwule Kasasa and the estate of the late Kabaka Edward Muteesa II, represented by key beneficiaries, including Prince David Wasajja.

Court records in Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2024 indicate that the matter had earlier been referred to mediation as part of efforts to resolve disagreements among executors and beneficiaries.

In its observations, the Supreme Court emphasized that estate administration must strictly reflect the intentions of the deceased as expressed in a valid will, and that executors are legally bound to act within that framework.

The justices further noted that in cases involving multiple executors, any decisions taken must align with both the testator’s wishes and applicable succession laws, reinforcing the legitimacy of the mediated settlement.

With the withdrawal dismissed with costs, the ruling effectively clears the way for full implementation of the Mutungo land settlement, bringing to a close years of legal wrangling over the disputed property.