The Masaka High Court has dismissed an application by the former foreign affairs Minister Sam Kuteesa Kahamba, to compel Alice Nambooze Osaga to deposit security for costs, in an ongoing land dispute between the two.
In a ruling dated 30 April 2026, Justice Fatuma Nanziri Bwanika said the court had dismissed Kuteesa’s application after it found that the issues he raised in his application were frivolous and intended to defeat justice and hearing of the main case.
In the main case, Nambooze is seeking to be declared the lawful owner of land comprised in Mawogola /MSK 547 Folio 6, Block 83 Plot 520, a case which arose from fraud after the land was allegedly unlawfully taken over by Kuteesa.
Kuteesa told court that Nambooze was not ordinarily resident in Uganda and had no known fixed abode or attachable property within the court’s jurisdiction.
Kuteesa further noted that Nambooze didn’t have a known source of income in Uganda, in the event that the main suit which he allegedly has a likelihood to win on merit, is dismissed she was unlikely to be able to pay costs that may be awarded to him.
However, in her ruling Justice Nanziri, noted that after reviewing the defence’s submissions, per Kuteesa’s application, found that the claim raises legitimate issues that warrant a full hearing.
“I am unable to say that the plaint is anywhere either frivolous or vexatious or still less an abuse of the process of court” she said.
Justice Nanziri further dismissed Kuteesa’s argument that Nambooze wasn’t a resident in Uganda and wouldn’t be able to pay her costs, as not sufficient ground to compel Nambooze to deposit security for costs.
Justice Nanziri further held that it would be speculative to assume that a Ugandan judgment would not be enforceable in the United States, emphasising that judicial decisions must be grounded in evidence rather than conjecture.
“It would be manifestly unjust to use a housing predicament allegedly created by the Applicant as a weapon to bar the Respondent’s access to the seat of justice” she said.
Justice Nanziri further dismissed Kuteesa’s argument that Nambooze, didn’t have a fixed place of residence in the country, since in her defence, Nambooze attributed it to Kuteesa allegedly taking over her land unlawfully.
“A justifiable dispute is before this Court, and the Respondent is entitled to have her suit heard and determined on its substantive merits. To grant this application would be to elevate the Applicant’s financial anxiety over the Respondent’s constitutional right to be heard, effectively shutting the courtroom doors based on an allegation of impecuniosity that the law has long deemed an insufficient ground for such an order” she said.
Justice Nanziri dismissed the application with costs to be determined in the main case over ownership of the contested land, which is now set to proceed to hearing.
