Court rejects bid to throw out sh1b farmers’ compensation case
Justice Vincent Wagona ruled that the preliminary objections raised by the defendants could not be conclusively determined at this stage because they involved disputed facts that require evidence at trial.
Court rejects bid to throw out sh1b farmers’ compensation case
________________
The High Court in Fort Portal has rejected a bid by Kyenjojo District Local Government and the Attorney General to throw out a sh1b compensation suit filed by 10 farmers over alleged losses caused by infected Irish potato seedlings supplied under the Operation Wealth Creation (OWC) programme.
Justice Vincent Wagona ruled that the preliminary objections raised by the defendants could not be conclusively determined at this stage because they involved disputed facts that require evidence at trial.
The farmers are seeking special damages of sh450.9m, general damages of sh300m and punitive and exemplary damages of sh250m, together with costs and interest.
The suit, filed in August 2024, is against the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS), Kyenjojo District Local Government and the Attorney General.
The farmers, who describe themselves as individual adult Ugandan farmers operating in Kyenjojo district, claim that in 2020 they approached the chief coordinator of Operation Wealth Creation with plans to grow Irish potatoes.
They subsequently wrote to OWC officials through the resident district commissioner, chief administrative officer and OWC coordinator in Kyenjojo, requesting Irish potato seedlings.
According to their plaint, the deputy chief coordinator of OWC later asked the executive director of NAADS to supply 400 bags of Rwangume Irish potato seedlings to the farmers under their umbrella, Kihura Youth Farmers Group.
The farmers said they were directed to prepare their gardens for planting in September 2020.
They consequently leased about 50 acres of land at sh15m, but the seedlings were not delivered as expected.
On March 12, 2021, NAADS, through OWC Kyenjojo, supplied 367 bags of Rwangume Irish potato seedlings.
The farmers said they planted the seedlings between March and August 2021, but several failed to germinate, while those that germinated later wilted and died.
They claimed that despite using modern irrigation systems, they obtained no harvest.
Laboratory tests conducted by Makerere University College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences in November 2021 allegedly showed that 98% of the tubers and 100% of the garden soil samples tested positive for Ralstonia solanacearum, the bacteria that causes bacterial wilt.
The farmers consequently accused the defendants and OWC officials of negligence, including failure to procure, test, audit and distribute disease-free and viable seedlings.
They also claimed that a NAADS official, Denis Yiga, visited the affected farms and promised compensation, but the payment was never made.
The Attorney General and Kyenjojo district denied liability and raised preliminary objections seeking to stop the case.
They argued that the suit was time-barred because tort claims against government entities must be filed within two years from the date the cause of action arose.
The defendants argued that the cause of action arose when the seedlings were delivered and planted in March 2021, yet the farmers filed the suit on August 21, 2024.
They also argued that the alleged promise by government officials to compensate the farmers created an expectation that the matter would be resolved administratively.
In his ruling, Justice Wagona held that although the special two-year limitation period applies to tort claims against Government entities, it was not possible to determine at the preliminary stage when the farmers' cause of action accrued.
He said the mere delivery of the seedlings did not, by itself, constitute actionable damage.
The judge noted that the farmers had pleaded that the seedlings subsequently failed to germinate, wilted and eventually resulted in crop failure.
He further said the significance of the November 2021 laboratory findings and the alleged promise of compensation by Government officials were matters requiring evidence.
Wagona held that where a preliminary objection depends on contested facts, factual inferences or evaluation of evidence, it ceases to be a pure point of law and should be determined at trial.
The judge held that the farmers had demonstrated sufficient legal interest in the case because they claimed to have personally participated in acquiring land, cultivating the seedlings and suffering financial losses.
He also noted that although the defendants had raised lack of locus standi, their lawyer did not make submissions in support of the objection.
The judge consequently dismissed the preliminary objections and ordered that the suit proceed to hearing on its merits.
He directed that costs of the preliminary objections would abide the outcome of the main suit.