A love story that spanned over a decade has ended not with vows, but in a courtroom clash over bricks, land, and betrayal. Robert Kabuye and Teopista Nanyonga, once cohabiting partners for 14 years, found themselves in a bitter legal battle over a modest plot of land in Ndejje-Lubugumu village, Makindye Sub County, after the collapse of their relationship.
The dispute, which began in the Makindye Magistrate’s Court and escalated to the High Court under Civil Appeal No. 57 of 2022, has captured attention for its potential impact on property rights among cohabiting couples in Uganda.
Kabuye claimed ownership of the 52ft by 32ft by 40ft then by 3oft plot, asserting that he personally purchased and developed the property, accommodating Nanyonga and her child from a previous relationship as a favor.
“I had a Kibanja at Ndejje Lubugumu Makindye Ssabagabo on which I constructed five rooms, and I allowed the respondent with her child… to be accommodated,” he stated.
He added that he later married another woman, Raste Nakayenga, with whom he shares a child, and attempted to evict Nanyonga to make way for his new family.
Nanyonga offered a starkly different account, insisting she had financed the land purchase, contributed heavily to construction, and managed payments to builders.
“Kabuye had no lawful claim and was instead trespassing on property that she rightfully owned,” her lawyers argued.
The initial ruling by Makindye Chief Magistrate Patience Lorna Tukundane sided with Nanyonga, concluding that Kabuye had contributed little and was entitled only to half the land’s value, excluding the developments largely financed by Nanyonga. Dissatisfied, Kabuye escalated the matter to the High Court.
Justice Elizabeth Jane Alividza, presiding over the case, undertook a painstaking review of the couple’s contributions.
Evidence showed Kabuye had provided transport, companionship, brick-making, and paid some utility bills, while Nanyonga funded construction, sold goods to generate income, and managed builder payments.
Justice Alividza noted: “It is not contested that the parties herein were staying together in cohabitation for over 10 years. The appellant (Kabuye) stated that he started living with the respondent in 1998 and stopped cohabiting in 2018.”
She referenced Uganda’s evolving jurisprudence, emphasizing that cohabiting couples often acquire, develop, or improve property together, even without formal marriage.
In her July 30, 2025 a ruling, Alividza determined that both parties had contributed to the property, though not equally. She awarded Kabuye one-third of the land and developments as they stood in 2018, while Nanyonga retained ownership of the rental units and subsequent developments.
The court directed that Kabuye’s share be paid in installments, with each party bearing their own legal costs. “The appeal partly succeeds. The lower court orders are set aside,” the ruling stated.
To legal experts and gender rights activists, the decision as a landmark for recognizing property rights among cohabiting partners, especially women, who were most affected.
