Joy Tumushabe & Anoer v M/S Anglo African Limited & anoer [1999] UGSC 5 (14 February 1999)

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang2057\deflangfe2057{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f248\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f249\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f251\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f252\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f253\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f254\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f255\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f256\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{ \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid14243511 Normal (Web);}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid3222648 footer;}{\*\cs17 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid3222648 page number;}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\pgptbl {\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid201458\rsid544555\rsid859892\rsid1396186\rsid1782116\rsid3222648\rsid3880476\rsid4277151\rsid5073621\rsid5251221\rsid5252931\rsid5268304\rsid5832825 \rsid5968468\rsid6046307\rsid7815987\rsid8061547\rsid9265784\rsid9378969\rsid9914884\rsid10696721\rsid11153714\rsid11234004\rsid11931861\rsid12600698\rsid12656087\rsid14243511\rsid14830933\rsid15095831\rsid15741217\rsid16525304}{\*\generator Microsoft Wor d 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA }{\author jchemeri}{\operator skivumbi}{\creatim\yr2009\mo12\dy2\hr13\min36}{\revtim\yr2009\mo12\dy3\hr11\min18}{\version3}{\edmins48}{\nofpages21}{\nofwords5942}{\nofchars33875}{\*\company JSI} {\nofcharsws39738}{\vern24689}}\paperw11906\paperh16838 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1800\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot14243511\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid3222648 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid3222648 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid3222648 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid3222648 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \linex0\headery708\footery708\colsx708\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid11931861\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\pvpara\phmrg\posxr\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9914884 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\field{\*\fldinst {\cs17\insrsid3222648 PAGE }}{\fldrslt { \cs17\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid1396186 15}}}{\cs17\insrsid3222648 \par }\pard \s16\ql \li0\ri360\widctlpar\tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin360\lin0\itap0\pararsid3222648 {\insrsid3222648 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1 \widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF UGANDA }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 AT MENGO}{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (CORAM: WAMBUZI, C. J. ODER, TSEKOOKO, KAROKORA AND KANYEIHAMBA, J. J. S. C.)}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 CIVIL APPEAL NO.7 OF 1999}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 BETWEEN}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 JOY TU}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 MUSHABE AND ANOTHER}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \'85\'85}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \'85\'85\'85.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 APPELLANTS}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 AND}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 M/}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 S ANGLO-AFRICAN LTD}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 AND ANOTHER}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \'85}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 .}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 RESPONDENTS}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (Appeal from the decision }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 and}{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 orders of the Court of Appeal at Kampala}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (Kato, Mpagi-Bahegeine and}{ \b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Berko, J. J. A}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 ) }{ \b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 dated 5th day}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of November, 1999 in Civil Appeal No.38 of 1997 confirming the decision and orders of the High Court of Uganda at Kampala (Ntabgoba, }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 P. J.)}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 dated 6th March, 1996 in Civil suit No.79 of 1995)}{ \b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3222648\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 JUDGMENT OF KANYEIHAMBA, J. S. C. }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 This is a second appeal. It is brought against the judgment and orders of the Court of Appeal confirming the judgment and orders of the High Court in }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 favor}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of the respondents.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The following appear to be the undisputed facts and background le}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 ading to this appeal. Plot No.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931\charrsid5252931 4}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 5}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Ben Kiwanuka Street in Kampala comprises of shop premises downstairs and a residential flat upstairs. Before the expulsion of Asians }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 by the Military regime in the 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 970s, the premises which I will}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 hereafter refer to as the suit }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 premises were owned by two Asians}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5252931 , a Mr. Hirji and a Mr. Laximida}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 s Dalia. Af ter the expulsion, the suit premises were vested in and managed by the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line The Departed Asians Property Custodian Board subsequently rented the residential flat to Joy Tumushabe, the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 st}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant in this appeal and the shop to Nyaburisa Enterprises Ltd, the 2}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 nd}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9265784 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant. The latter carried on the business of a shop which was managed by the 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 On 28}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 th}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9265784 April, 1993, Laximida}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 s Dalia obtained repossession of the suit premises and as he lived outside Uganda, he appointed M/s Anglo African Limited, the 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9265784 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 respondent whose Managing Director was one Rennie Richardson, to manage the suit premises. Dalia\rquote s letter written on }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 15/3/93}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 and appointing Anglo African Limited as Managers of th e suit premises was copied to the tenants in the suit premises and it informed them that the new managers of the property who were to manage it for a period of twelve months only, would have authority not only to manage but also to collect rent and deal w ith any matter pertaining to the management of the property. \line Following repossession, the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board notified all the tenants in the premises and advised them to deal with the owner who had now become the landlord instead of the Board.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 \par On 20/}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 9/93, Dalia appointed Mr. Rennie Richardson, C/o Anglo African Limited, to be his attorney and, in Dalia\rquote s name and on his behalf, to act and do all, or any of the things an } {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 attorney may do in relation to the suit premises. The a ppellants, on the advice of their lawyer, refused to pay the rents to the first respondent, challenging the status of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9265784 Laximida}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 s Dalia as owner of the suit premises. In fact, the appellants obtained a temporary }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 injunction}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 from the High Court restraining Dalia or his manager from evicting them. Subsequently, the temporary }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 injunction}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 was vacated, but the appellants persisted in refusing to pay the rents due.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 On 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 August, 1994}{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 , }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 M/s Anglo African Limited, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 authorized}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in writing, M/s Security Auctioneers to \lquote levy and distress for rent and evict\rquote the appell}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 ants from the suit premises. M/}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 s Security Auctioneers Limited gave instructions to their employee, Mr. Freddie M.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9265784 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Kasozi to}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 the}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 effect the wishes of M/s Anglo African L}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 imited, and to levy from the 2}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 nd}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant, the sum of shs. 23,142,024/= in respect of rents }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid8061547\charrsid5252931 for the shop and fix}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid9265784 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant, the sum of shs. 2}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 , 972,075/}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 = }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in respect of rents for the residential fiat. M/s Security Auctioneers gave notices to the appellants demanding payments of the moneys d ue and vacation of the suit premises without further delay. The notices to the appellants were dated 9th August, 1994. With no positive responses from the appellants, the respondents, with heavy support from the police, invaded the suit premises and proce e ded to take into their custody property belonging to the appellants. The appellants brought a suit in the High Court against the respondents claiming that the respondents had neither the capacity nor legal authority to carry out distress for rent or evict

the appellants. In the suit, the appellants claimed both special and general damages. For the respondents, it was submitted that as the appellants had resisted the authority of the lawful owners and refused to pay rent, they had become trespassers and the owners or their agents were entitled to distress for rent and evict the appellants from the suit premises.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line After hearing the evidence and submissions of counsel for all the parties, the learned Principal Judge dismissed the claim with costs and concluded his judgment with the words, \'93 The first plaintiff should, if she wishes, collect from the two defendants the items of property listed down in Exhibit D. 1\'94 The appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal which confirmed the decision and orders of the High Court and dismissed the appeal with costs, hence this appeal. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The Memorandum of Appeal contains five grounds fr }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 amed as follows \line 1. The learned }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 justices of Appeal erred in law and fact and misdirected themselves on interpretation of section 3 of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the Distre ss for Rent (Bailiffs) Act, (Cap. 68).}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line 2. The learned Justices of Appeal erred in law and fact when they failed to properly evaluate the evidence as the first appellate court, thereby arriving at wrong conclusions that \line (a) The landlord legally exercised the right to levy distress \line (b) M/s Anglo African Ltd. were Laximides Dalia\rquote s attorneys. \line (c) Exhibit P.1 was impliedly revoked by Exhibit D.3 \line (d) No property was levied from the shop and no proof thereof. \line (e) The Appellants were not entitled to damages.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 3. The learned Justices of Appeal erred in law and fact when they held that Freddie Kasozi acted lawfully.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 4. The learned Justices of Appeal erred in law and fact when they failed to consider the admissibility of Exhibit D.l as ground of Appeal}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 . \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 5. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The learned Justices of Appeal erred in law and fact when they failed to order that the property levied in the flat be returned to the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 1}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 appellant}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 . }{ \b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Mr. Babigumira argued grounds 1,2, and 3 together. He first submitted that the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 appellants,}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 who had been lawful tenants of the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board, had refused to accept Mr. Laximides Dalia as their landlord or owner of the suit property. Indeed, on this very matter, the appellants had gotten a High Court temporary }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 injunction}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 against the alleged owner albeit that the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 injunction }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 was later vacated. In consequence, neither Mr. Laximidas Dalia nor anyone else }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 purporting}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to act on his behalf had authority to distress for rent against or evict the appellants from the suit premises. Counsel cited }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Souza Figueiredo & Co. Ltd. v. George & Others }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (1959), }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 E. A. }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 756, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in support of the proposition that there must be a landlord/tenant relationship before a landlord can exercise his powers under the law. In holding that this relationship exist ed between Mr. Laximides Dalia and the appellants, the learned Principal Judge had erred in both fact and law and, in confirming the decision of the trial court, the Court of Appeal had, as a first appellate court, failed to reevaluate the evidence. Mr. B abigumira further submitted that the persons who are by law }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to distress for rent are either the actual owners of the suit premises, or their duly appointed attorneys, or a certified bailiff or a claimant of a reversionary interest in the premises . These are the requirements of the Distress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act, (Cap. 68) and according to the rules under the same Act, such distress may only be }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 affected}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 by a person who has either a general or special certificate to distress for rent. Neither Laxi mides Dalia nor anyone claiming to act on his behalf or with power of attorney had any authority to distress for rent or evict the appellants from the suit premises. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In consequence, in distressing for rent and evicting the appellants, the respondents had acted illegally. In the first instance, neither Anglo African Limited nor Mr. Charles Rwija were licensed court brokers or bailiffs and neither could instruct anyone else to act on their behalf as such. The instrument which Laximides Dalia executed on 20 S eptember, 1993 appointed one Rennie Richardson as attorney in his personal capacity and the fact that he happened also to be the managing director of Anglo African Limited did not, in any way, make the latter the attorney. It was therefore erroneous on th e part of the Court of Appeal to infer from these facts that Anglo African Limited was the duly appointed attorney of the owner of the suit property since it was not Richardson who gave instructions to distress for rent or evict the appellants. A power of attorney cannot be granted by an agent of a person who holds that power nor indirectly by the holder to a }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 j}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 uristic person of which he happens to be a director. Consequently, the instructions to and the actions of the auctioneers did not comply with the requ irements of the law and were therefore illegal. Counsel contended that the decision of Justice Berko, J. A, that exhibit P1 had been \line impliedly revoked by exhibit D3 was erroneous both in law and fact since the two documents were not linked at all. P1 which granted powers of management to Anglo African Ltd. and which had, in any event, expired, was not connected with exhibit D3 which dealt with the appointment and powers of Rennie Richardson as attorney. In effect, the Court of Appeal had failed to correctl y reassess the evidence on this matter.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 On the issue of the number and type of property taken from both the flat and shop, it was the contention of counsel for the appellants that the Court of Appeal should have rejected the trial court\rquote s findings and held the first appellant\rquote s own list of the property and its value as correct. He submitted that the court had therefore erred in holding that as there was no proof regarding the property which had been levied from the shop, the appellants were not entitled to t he return of any of it. On ground 3 of appeal, counsel for the appellants submitted that since the evidence showed that Freddie Kasozi was not qualified to act as a bailiff and had not been properly appointed to act on behalf of the auctioneers, the Court of Appeal erred in both law and fact when it held that Freddie Kasozi had acted lawfully.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par \line Mr. Nkurunziza fo}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 r the respondent opposed the appeal. He argued ground I of the appeal first. He contended that the appellants had failed to show that the Court of Appeal had misconstrued the law. A refusal by a tenant to submit to the authority of a new landlord who has legally and legitimately succeeded another does not, in any way, alter their relationship of landlord and tenant. It was therefore counsel\rquote s content ion that both the trial Judge and the Court of Appeal had properly construed section 3 of the Distress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act. On whether or not Freddie Kasozi, the second respondent, was qualified, Mr. Nkurunziza submitted that Kasozi worked for Charles Rwija, the owner of Security Auctioneers who were qualified to distress for rent, and acted as their agent. Mr. Nkurunziza submitted that the case }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Souza Figueir}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 edo & Co Ltd. }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 v. George and Others }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (supra) cited by counsel for the appellants in support of his submissions was distinguishable from the facts of this case in that in the }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Souza }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 case, no}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 legal relationship existed between the parties at all.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid201458\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 With regard to grounds 2 and 3 of the appeal, counsel for the respondents submitted that the evidence of R ennie Richardson showed that as director of Anglo African Limited, he was acting for and on behalf of that firm in the management of the suit premises and in the exercise of the power of attorney granted to him by Laximides Dalia. Counsel therefore conten ded that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal were correct in their decisions relating to ground 2 (a) (b) and (c) of this appeal.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 On ground 3, counsel submitted that the appellants had not shown that Freddie Kasozi was not acting with authority. Respondents had shown that Kasozi was an employee of the Security Auctioneers owned by Rwija. The onus of disproving these facts rested upo n the appellants an}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 d they had failed to discharge }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 it. The High Court and the Court of Appeal relied upon those facts and relationships between the parties whose decision, as in the case }{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Kampala City}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 v. Nakay}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 e (1972) }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 E. A. 446, depended on the credibility of witnesses. The courts\rquote findings in this case were amply supported by other evidence. Counsel contended that in relation to the items of goods levied in the suit premises, the trial Judge had opportunity to observe the }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 demeanor}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of witnesses and to believe or disbelieve any of them. In the result the learned trial Judge chose to believe one set of figures rather than the other and the Justices of appeal had no reason to disagree with him. Mr. Nkurunziza submitted that the property which had been l egally removed from the suit premises had been witnessed by a police officer who countersigned the list containing that property and the appellants could have collected that property as suggested by the learned trial Judge but they chose not to do so. In the result, counsel for the respondent asked this Court to dismiss grounds 2 and 3 of the appeal.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Although the pleadings and the submissions do not bring them out precisely, it is my opinion that this appeal raises two distinct and different issues to be c onsidered and resolved. These are whether or not the distress for rent and seizure of appellants\rquote property for purposes of levying them for rent were lawful and, whether in any event, the owner of the suit premises or his }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 agents had power to evi ct tenants who had resisted his authority and notices to quit and whether such owner or the said agents had authority to detain appellants\rquote property after eviction.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I will deal with the matter of distress for rent first. On the facts of this case, there i s no doubt in my mind that a landlord/tenant relationship existed between Laximides Dalia who had repossessed the suit premises from the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board and the appellants. Previous to the incidents leading to this case, the appel l ants had properly and regularly acknowledged the Board as their landlords. Repossession of the suit premises was lawfully effected and accepted by the Custodian Board which informed the appellants in writing of the new change of ownership. There is eviden ce that the appellants challenged the right of Laximides Dalia to the repossession certificate by way of a High Court suit and obtained a temporary }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 injunction}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 which was later vacated.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Their challenge against the owner\rquote s entitlement to the suit premises an d their refusal to pay rents due changed their status from lawful tenants to trespassers. Mr. Nkurunziza cited a passage }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 from}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Halsbury\rquote s Laws of England, Third Edition, vol.38, at p.741, paragraph 1207 in which the learned authors observe, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931

\par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93If}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 a tenancy d etermines by effluxion of time or otherwise, and}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 former tenant remains in possession against the will of the rightful owner the former tenant is, apart from statutory protection, a trespasser from the date of the determination of the tenancy.\'94 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 which is relevant to this case.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In my opinion, when the appellants refused to pay rent or acknowledge the title of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the owner as landlord, they became trespassers. The argument of counsel for the appellants that since they did not at any time accept Laximides Dalia as the true owner of the suit premises indicates that the relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between the parties is correct because they immediately became trespassers. At this juncture, the landlord could have chosen to legally evict them as trespassers. However, he or his agents chose to proceed under the provisions of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the Distress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act, (Cap. 68). I agree with the submissions of counsel for the appellants that he who chooses to distress for rent under the Act must do so st rictly in accordance with the provisions and rules of that Act. The bailiffs who are }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to distress for rent must be qualified and do so in accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed in the Act or rules made }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 there under}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 . In any event, dist ress for rent is only permissible if the relationship of tenant and landlord exists between the parties but as I have shown, that relationship had ceased to exist as a result of the appellants\rquote acts and conduct. In the result, distress for rent in this case was effected against trespassers, and it could not have been possible for the persons who effected the alleged distress for rent to do so under the Act.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Another question to answer on grounds 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 , 2}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 and 3 of appeal is whether the respondents were qualified bailiffs in accordance}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 with the law}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in his leading judgment, Berko, J. A. quite rightly, stated that the determination of the issues raised in grounds (a) (b) and (c) required a consideration of the provisions of the Distress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act, (Cap. 68). The learned Justice then cited section }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 3 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of the Act which provides; }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93 3. From and after the commencement of this Act, no person, other than a landlord in person, his attorney or the legal owner of th}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 e reversion, shall act as baili}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 ff to levy any distress for rent unless he shall be }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 authorized}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to act as }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 bailiff}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 by a }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 certificate}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in writing under the hand of a certifying officer, and such }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 certificate}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 may be general or apply to a particular distress or distresses }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 .\'94 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 According to the learned Justice a }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 certifying}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 officer is, a magistrate of the First Class, a Chief Magistrate and a Magistrate Grade One. Persons }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 under t he Act to levy distress for rent include (a) the landlord himself (b) an attorney of the landlord, (c) the legal owner of the reversion, and (d) any person }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 authorized}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to act as bailiff by a certificate in writing under the hand of a magistrate.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9378969\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The evidence before the learned trial Judge and the submissions before the Court of Appeal do not reveal that any of the persons enumerated above as }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 is the person or persons who distressed for rent under the Act. Despite the absence of such evidence the l earned Justice of the Court of Appeal, Berko, J. A, concluded,}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93The authority to manage the suit property emanated}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 from Exh. D. 3 and was operative when the instructions to levy the distress for rent were given. The learned Judge was therefore right when h e held that since Anglo-African Ltd. were managers of the suit }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 property}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 and were the attorney of the landlord, they were }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 authorized}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 to levy distress for rent on the suit property. The instr}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 uctions to evict the plaintiff were}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 given to a firm known as Security Auctioneers. The sole proprietor}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 of this firm is one Charles Rwija who is a court bailiff .}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The general nature of the business of the firm is said to be Court }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 Bailiffs/ Auctioneers. Charles Rwij}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 a apparently does business under the name and style of Security Auctioneers. I am unable to find anything wrong in Anglo-African Ltd. employing court bail to levy the distress.\'94}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 With great respect, the learned Justice\rquote s conclusions have very little bearing to the requirements of the terms and conditions of the Dis tress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act under which the respondents carried out the distress and seizure of the appellants\rquote property for purposes of levying it for rents due. I agree with the submissions of counsel for the appellants that on this matter the trial Ju dge did not properly evaluate the evidence and the re-evaluation of the same by the of the Justices of the Court of Appeal fell far short of the standard reflected in the judgment of Oder,J. S. C., with which the other members of the Court concurred in }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Banco Arabe Espanol v. Bank of Uganda. Civ. App. No.8. of 1999 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 where my learned brother said, }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93 in my opinion the present is one of the clear cases in which it is incumbent on this court to re-evaluate the evidence. This is because, with the greatest respect, the Court of}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Appeal}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 failed in its duty, as first Court o}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 f }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Appeal to subject the evidence in the case to that fresh scrutiny which the appellant expected it to do.\'94}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Eastern Radio Service And}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 Another v. R. J}{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Patel t/a Tiny Tots And Another }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (1962) }{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 E. A. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 818, the appellant was a tenant and the first respondent was landlord of certain premises in respect of which the landlord adv}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 ocates claimed some shs. 14,000/}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 = for arrears of rent and expenses and in their letter of claim also indicated that the landlord might exercise his right of re-entry for non-payment of the rent.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Later, proceedings were instituted for rent arrears and for vacant possession of the premise s. Subsequently, the plaint was amended to exclude the claim for vacant possession. In February, 1959, the first respondent }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 authorized}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the second respondent to levy for distress in respect of rent accruing from June 1, 1958 to January 31, 1959. The goods w ere later sold by auction. The appellant filed an action for damages against both respondents claiming that the distress for rent was unlawful since rent payable became due after the first respondent had enforced his right for forfeiture and therefore the tenant had become a trespasser against whom no distress of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 rent could ensue. It was also alleged that the second respondent was not a holder of a }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 bailiff\rquote s}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 certificate. The trial judge held that the first respondent had not really finally elected to termin ate the tenancy and in any event, was not vicariously liable for the acts of the second respondent who distressed for the rent. On appeal, the President of the Court, Sinclair P. with Newbold, J. A. concurring, held that the first and second respondents we re both liable in }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 trespass}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 as joint tortfeasors, as if it was a case of principal and agent. The damages which had been awarded by the trial Judge were increased.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In the case of }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Kanji Naran Patel v. Noor Essa And}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Another, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (1965) E. A. 484, it was held that when a distress for rent is illegal, it is the bailiff who is primarily liable and the landlord is only liable, if he can be shown to have sanctioned or ratifies the bailiffs wrongful act. In light of what I have said on the matter of distress for rent an d, bearing in mind the authorities reviewed, it is my opinion that grounds 1 and 2 (a), (b) and (c) must succeed.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9265784 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I now come to the second issue which is implicit in grounds 2 (d) and (c) and ground 3 of appeal, namely the issue of whether the eviction of the appellants fr}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 om the suit premises was lawfu}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 l and whether in the process of that eviction, the respondents were entitled to remove and take away the appellants\rquote property. I do not agree with the submissions of counsel for the appellants that their evict ion had to comply with the provisions of the Distress for Rent (Bailiffs) Act. I have }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 already}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 held that despite the appellants\rquote protests and refusal to acknowledge Laximidas Dalia as the new owner of the suit premises, in both law and fact he was the owner and they had become trespassers.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12656087 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Secondly, I have also}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 observed that where tenants defy}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the landlord\rquote s terms and conditions of tenancy agreed between the parties, and the landlord gives notice to repossess or effect a lawful act which the tenants continu e to disregard, they become trespassers on the property concerned. In that event, the owner may resort to any legal means to achieve the desired objective, namely of evicting the defiant trespassers as well as removing their property from the premises so as to leave those premises vacant.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Thus, in a series of cases, including }{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Jackson }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 v. Courteneou (1857) }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 8 E & B. 8, }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 Ex. Ch}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 .. Scott v. Matthew Brown & Co. Ltd. (1884)51 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 LT. 746, }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Shaw v. Chairitle }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (185O) }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 3 Car. & Kir. 21 }{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 and }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Hemmings v. Stoke Pages Golf Club Limited}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 And Another (1920) }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 1K. B. 720 (C. A.), it has been the principle that if a trespasser peacefully enters or is on a land, the person who is in, or entitled to, possession may request him to leave, and if he refuses to leave that person may remove him f rom the land, using no more force than is reasonably }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 necessary}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 . In the case of }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Heminings And Wife v. The Stoke Pages Golf Club Limited}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 And}{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Another }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (supra), Scrutton, L. J. said,}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5968468\charrsid5252931 }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93This case raises a legal question of great interest and general importance, s hortly stated the question is whether, an owner of landed property finds a trespasser on his premises, he may enter the premises and turn the trespasser out, using no more force, than is necessary to expel him, without having to pay damages for the force used So stated, common honesty and common sense would answer, \'93of course he may.\'94 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Under the circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the respondents had the power to evict the appellants from the suit premises in accordance with the provisions of th e law. It is trite law that the owner of property has the right to evict a trespasser who has refused to vacate the property as was held in }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Harvey v. Brvdges}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 14M}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 &}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W437.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Moreover, where such eviction is effected, the owner may also remove the property and goods of the person evicted to leave the premises empty. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In light of the foregoing, grounds 2 (e) and (3) in so far as they relate to the eviction of the appellants from the suit premises must fail.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Finally, I will deal with grounds 4 and }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 5 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 of the appeal. The matters which are raised in these grounds relate to what the appellants claim were ignored by the Court of Appeal. The grounds of appeal which that Court did not co nsider and resolve, were specifically framed in the memorandum of appeal before that Court as follows: }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93(c) The learned Judge having found that the respondents had taken the 1}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid12656087 st}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12656087 appellant }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 properly erred in refusing to order that respondents return the 1st appellant }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 s\rquote }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 property or pay to the 1st appellant the value of the property so taken. \line (f) The learned Judge erred in law when he admitted in evidence exhibit D4 (sic)\'94}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5073621\charrsid5252931 \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 For the appellants, Mr. Babigumira submitted that the Court of Appeal erred in law and fact when it failed to consider and resolve the issues raised in these two grounds. Counsel cited the case of }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Trevor Price & Another v. Raymond Kelsall (1957) }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 L. A. }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 752 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 in support of his submissions on ground }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 5. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 On ground 4 Mr. Babigumira contended tha t whether or not a document is admissible in evidence is a matter of law, yet the learned Justice Berko, J. A. treated this matter as obiter.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12656087 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Mr. Nkurunziza for the respondent contended that the judgment of the Court of Appeal on grounds 4 and }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid12656087 5 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 was correct . He submitted that the appellants had failed to show any reasons why the judgment on those grounds should not be upheld. He further contended that the findings on ground }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid12656087 5}{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 by the trial Judge were based on the evidence, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 demeanor} {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 and credence of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 witnesses a nd therefore the Court of Appeal had no reason not to believe the findings of the learned trial Judge. On ground 4 of appeal, Mr. Nkurunziza contended that since on all other grounds the Court of Appeal had confirmed that t}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 he distress for rent was lawful}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 , there was no need to consider any other grounds of the appeal.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Before disposing of the two grounds, I wish to note that the findings of the learned Justice of appeal, Berko J. A., who gave the leading judgment on }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid12656087 those}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 two }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 grounds,}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 were couched in the following words }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93Since I have found that both the eviction and distress for rent were lawfully done, there is no need to consider the grounds that deal with }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 remedies.\'94}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par I}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 t is also worth noting that there were other grounds not considered by the same Court, namely (d) and (e). }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12656087 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 With respect, not all the grounds not considered by the Court of Appeal were remedial as stated by the learned Justice. Indeed, ground (f) was not r emedial at all but involved an essential document submitted to the Court as evidence. Its admission or inadmissibility might have led either or both of the Courts below to come to different conclusions on the case.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In my view, litigants or appellants before any Court are entitled to have a ground or grounds of their claims or appeal, as the case maybe, considered and resolved by the Court if that ground or grounds would, if not dealt with, leave some matter or matte r s raised in the case unresolved. Failure to consider and resolve such matters or evaluate or re-evaluate the evidence relating to the same would be a failure on the part of the Court to do its duty. Such failure would necessitate an appellate Court or a s econd appellate court to intervene to ensure that no miscarriage of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 justice was occasioned by such failure and that the evidence is re-evaluated in accordance with the rules of the Courts. Thus in }{\i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Trevor Price And Another v. Raymond Kelsall }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (supra), it was held that; }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93 Where it is apparent that the evidence has not been subjected to adequate scrutiny by the trial Court before expressing a view it is open to an appellate court to find that the view of the Judge.... is ill-founded it is the duty of an appellat e Court to evaluate evidence itself\rquote }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In my opinion, the Court of Appeal failed to do so on the two grounds. And as \line we have reiterated in a number of decisions including that in }{ \i\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Banco Arabe \line Espanol v. Bank of Uganda, }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 (supra) in such cases, we as a second a}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 ppellate \line Court will do so. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12656087 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \line }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The ground framed in paragraph (d) of the Memorandum of Appeal before the Court of Appeal which was factual and evidential should have been resolved one way or the other in the interests of} {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 justice. On ground 4 of the appea l before this court the Court of Appeal should have considered and resolved the issue of whether or not exhibit Dl was admissible. The Court simply commented that the trial Judge should have made a ruling on it without the Justices of the Court of Appeal themselves doing so. In my opinion, by failing to do so, the Court of Appeal misdirected itself It is also my view that, in any event, Exhibit Dl was admissible.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 With regard to ground 5 of the appeal, although I have held that, the seizure of the first appellant\rquote s property from the flat for purposes of distressing for rent was illegal, I have also held that her eviction from the flat as a trespasser was lawful and justified.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1396186 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In the result, this Appeal partially succeeds. Taking into account all the facts a nd circumstances of this case, I would order that such property as was proved to have been removed and listed in accordance with the findings of the trial Court should be returned to the appellants or its value paid to them by way of compensation. In addi tion, the sum of one hundred shillings (100/= }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 )}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 is awarded to the 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 st}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 appellant as general damages for the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid11234004\charrsid5252931 unlawful}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 distress for rent. The eviction of the appellants from the suit premises was lawful and is hereby confirmed. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 The appellants are awarded one half (1/2) of the costs of this appeal. \line Dated at Mengo this .... 15th day of... . February 1999}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 . \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 G. W.}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 KANYEIH}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 AMBA \line JUSTICE OF }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 THE }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 SUPREME COURT }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS \line A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W. MASALU MUSENE \line REGISTRAR, THE SUPREME COURT }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \par \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 \par \par \par \par \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 JUDGMENT OF WAMBUZI. C. J. }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I had the benefit of reading in draft the judgment prepared by Kanyeihamba, JSC which sets out the facts. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I agree that this appeal raises two broad issues, that is, whether the distress for rent and the evictions were }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 lawful}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 . The third issue was the admissibility of exhibit D4.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I also agree that the memorandum of appeal could have been better framed, for example, ground 1 provides:}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \'93The learned Justices of}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Appeal erred in law and }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 fact and misdirected themselves on interpretation of section 3 }{ \i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 of the Distress for rent (Bailiffs act) (cap 68) \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1396186 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3880476\charrsid5252931 This ground offends rule 81 of the rules of this court, which provides that a memorandum of appeal shall set forth concisely}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5268304\charrsid5252931 under distinct heads without argument or narrative the gr ounds of objection to the decision appealed against specifying the points, which are allegedly to have been wrongly decided. Ground 1 does not say in what way the court of appeal}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5251221\charrsid5252931 \rquote s decision is wrong. One has to go to ground 2 to appreciate the alleged misd irection on the interpretation of section 3 of the distress for rent ( bailiffs) act: that is to say whether the provisions of that section were complied with. Under that section the persons who could levy distress for rent are the landlord himself}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5832825\charrsid5252931 , the attorney of the landlord, the legal owner of the reversion and a person authorized to act as bailiff by a certificate in writing under the hand of a magistrate. \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5832825\charrsid5252931 On the facts and evidence there is no dispute as to who the landlord is. The dispute is whether the first respondent, Anglo- African Ltd, was appointed attorney by the landlord. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1396186 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5832825\charrsid5252931 According to a letter to all the tenants dated 15} {\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid5832825\charrsid5252931 th}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5832825\charrsid5252931 March, 1993, signed by Dalia, Exh. P1, Anglo-African Ltd. was appointed property managers, authorized to collect rents}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid544555\charrsid5252931 and to deal with any matter pertaining to management of the property for twelve months. It was not Rene Richardson as held by the learned Berko J. A. It seems to me therefore that on 1}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid544555\charrsid5252931 st }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid544555\charrsid5252931 August 1994 when M/s. Anglo African Ltd. authorized security auctioneers to levy }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid859892\charrsid5252931 distress they have no authority to manage given to them on 15/3/93 expired in March 1994. The power of attorney dated 20/9/93, Exh D3 were given to Rennie A. Richardson who appointed manager and not to Anglo-African Ltd. These are two different peo ple in law and the fact that Richardson was director or Managing director of Anglo-African Ltd does not alter the position . Whereas Richardson could as Managing Director act for Anglo- African Ltd. Anglo-African Ltd. could not act for Richardson}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 .}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 With respect, I think it was }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 misdirection}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 on the evidence by the learned justices of appeal to conclude that the first respondent had power to exercise the power of attorney. I would accordingly agree that the distress for rent was illegal. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1396186 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 On the record o f the proceedings as it stands in the two courts below, it appears that the appellants never recognized Dalia as their landlord. They never paid rent. They questioned the landlord\rquote s title and even obtained an injunction against }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 the landlord. It seems to me that at that point, there was no lease between the parties and the would be lessees became trespassers from the very beginning. In any case, it seems that the learned trial Judge found as a fact that by the time of eviction, the appellants were trespasse rs. This in my view would be another reason for holding the distress illegal, as there was no landlord and tenant relationship.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Coming to the second issue of whether the evictions were lawful, it is well settled that if a tenancy determines and the former tenant remains in possession against the will of the }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 rightful}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 owner, the former tenant is a trespasser from the date of the d}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 etermination of the tenancy (Hal}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 sbury\rquote s Laws of England, 3}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid1396186 rd}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Edition, Vol.3 8, p.741).}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line In the case before us, there was a tenancy betw}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 een the Custodian Board and the }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Appellants. When Dalia obtained repossession of his property the appellants refused to }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 recognize}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 his title and it would appear to me that any lease of the property by the appellants determined at that }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 point. \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 It appears that a trespasser who refuses to leave may be removed from the land using no more force than is reasonably necessary (Halsbury}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \rquote s}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Laws of England, 3rd Edition, Vol. 38, p.\rquote 747).}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In this case I do not think it matters who carried out the actual eviction as long as they are acting for and on behalf of the landlord. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1396186 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 It was open to the respondent to simply remove the property from his land It appears that the property was actually carried away and kept by the respondent, ostensibly for purposes of levying distress for rent. As the respondents were not entitled to levy distress for rent on the appellants\rquote goods they were under a duty to make the goods carried away available to the appellants or to pay the value of such goods as were proved to have been carried away for which the respondent failed to account to the appellants. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 This brings me to the third issue in this appeal relating to admissible of Exh. Dl. I agree, with respect, that the Court of Appeal erred in law when it failed to consider the ground of appeal relating to the admissibility of Exh. D4. It was not a matter for comment as obiter.}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Be that as it may, the record indicates that the admissibility of Exh. D4 was objected to and the document was admitted fo}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 r identification purposes, the }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 learned trial Judge reserving his ruling on it in his }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 judgment}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 . The learned Berko, J. A. quite correctly, in my view, pointed out that in this particular case, the court should have ruled on the matter as the parties were entitled to know whether or not to rely upon it as evidence. It turns out, however, that the admissibility of Eh. D4 was not in issue at the stage the parties}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12600698\charrsid5252931 made their final submissions. I}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 t was admitted that the first appellant\rquote s property was taken away and that later she was invited to collect her property but failed to do so. The learned trial Judge did not specifically rule on the admissibility of Exh. D4 but he relied on it as indicating what property had been taken away by the respondents. The exhibit was properly }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 produced;}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 there was evidence of its mak}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 ing and being witnessed. In the circumstances, I am unable to say that failure to rule on the admissibility of the document}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 occasioned any miscar}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 r}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 i}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 age of}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 justice.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 In the circumstances, I would agree with the orders proposed by the learned Kanyeihamba, JSC and as the other members of the Court agree with the judgment and order of the learned Justice of Appeal, there will be orders}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 in the terms proposed by him. \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 Dated at Mengo this .... 15th day of .... February 1999}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5252931 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 S. W. W. WAMBUZI \line CHIEF JUSTICE }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 I CERTI}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 FY THAT THIS IS}{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGI}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 NAL}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85..}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W. MASALU MUSENE \line REGISTRAR, THE SUPREME COURT }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 JUDGMENT OF ODER J. S. C.}{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I have had the benefit of reading in draft the judgment of Kanyeihamba, J. S. C. \line I agree with the conclusions made and the reasons given by him. I have nothing \line useful to add.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 \line Dated at Mengo this .... 15}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 th}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 day of .... February 1999}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 A. H. O. ODER \line JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931

\par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS \line A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85..}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W. MASALU MUSENE}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 REGISTRAR, THE SUPREME COURT \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 JUD}{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 G}{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 E}{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 MENT OF}{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 TSEKOOKO, J. S. C.}{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid10696721\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I have had the benefit of reading in draft the lead judgment of Kanyeihamba, J. S. C. and that of Wambuzi, C. J. I agree with the conclusions reached in this matter and the orders proposed by Kanyeihamba, J. S. C. I have nothing useful to add. \line Delivered at Mengo this ....15th day of .... February 1999}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 . \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 J. W. N.}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 TSEKOOKO \line JUSTICE OF THE}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 SUPREME COURT}{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 CERTIFY THAT THIS}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 IS \line A TRUE}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85..}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W. MASALU MUSENE \line REGISTRAR, THE}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 SUPREME COURT}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1396186 \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par \par }{\b\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 JUDGMENT OF KAROKORA}{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 , }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 J. S. C. }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I have had th e advantage of reading in draft the judgment prepared by my learned brother Kanyeihamba, J. S. C. I agree with his judgment and the orders he proposed. I have nothing useful to add. \line Dated at Mengo }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 this.... }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 15th day of .... February 1999}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 . \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line A. N. KAROKORA}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 .}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \line }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS \line A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid1782116\charrsid5252931 \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 W. MASALU MUSENE \line REGISTRAR, THE}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 SUPREME COURT }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14243511\charrsid5252931 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5252931 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid14830933\charrsid5252931 \par }}