UPC opts to settle dispute
Mar 17, 2009
THE Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and the Milton Obote Foundation have agreed to mutually settle their dispute over property management.
By Hillary Nsambu
THE Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and the Milton Obote Foundation have agreed to mutually settle their dispute over property management.
The lawyers representing the two groups recently told Justice Anna Magezi of the High Court’s land division that there was progress in reaching a settlement.
“It is delayed because of the changes in governance of the foundation. We need two weeks to conclude the settlement,†the lawyers told the court.
The judge ordered the two parties to report to court their conclusion of the talks on April 3.
Peter Mukidi Walubiri represented UPC, while Sam Sserwanga and Chris Madrama represented the foundation.
The party sued the foundation and its two subsidiaries, Ugationers Ltd and Uganda Press Trust Ltd for breach of trust.
It sought a declaration that it is the equitable owner of them all.
The party also wanted court to compel the defendants to account for the proceeds from the subsidiary companies of the foundation and to restrain the managers from mortgaging or subleasing the property without its consent.
THE Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and the Milton Obote Foundation have agreed to mutually settle their dispute over property management.
The lawyers representing the two groups recently told Justice Anna Magezi of the High Court’s land division that there was progress in reaching a settlement.
“It is delayed because of the changes in governance of the foundation. We need two weeks to conclude the settlement,†the lawyers told the court.
The judge ordered the two parties to report to court their conclusion of the talks on April 3.
Peter Mukidi Walubiri represented UPC, while Sam Sserwanga and Chris Madrama represented the foundation.
The party sued the foundation and its two subsidiaries, Ugationers Ltd and Uganda Press Trust Ltd for breach of trust.
It sought a declaration that it is the equitable owner of them all.
The party also wanted court to compel the defendants to account for the proceeds from the subsidiary companies of the foundation and to restrain the managers from mortgaging or subleasing the property without its consent.