The International Business Science and Technology University (ISBAT) could be evicted from its premises along Lugogo By Pass after the government cancelled its land title.
The cancellation came after a Muslim Community claimed ownership of the same land and tabled a duplicate title.
This week, the university got some respite after the High Court allowed its application, saying it was not given a fair hearing before the title was cancelled.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Joyce Kavuma, who said ISBAT had shown “good reason” for failing to bring the case within the normal three-month deadline.
The dispute began in 2016 when ISBAT became the registered owner of land on Plot 54, Naguru Drive. According to the documents in court, the land had first been registered in the names of a man called Silivano Anwangkane on April 26, 2016.
A month later, on May 31, 2016, Anwangkane transferred the land to ISBAT.
The university said this should have settled ownership. But unknown to ISBAT, a second title covering the same land had allegedly been created in 2011. The university’s director, Varghese Mundattan, told the court that ISBAT only discovered this competing title much later.
The first major conflict arose in 2017 when ISBAT wrote to the Commissioner for Land Registration, who is also asking the office to cancel the 2011 title.
Nothing was done about this letter.
Matters escalated years later in July 2023 when ISBAT says it was blindsided by news that its own title had been cancelled. Mundattan stated that he learnt of the cancellation on July 18, 2023, only after representatives of the Muslim community that had the competing title told him to vacate the land.
These representatives were the Trustees of Misbahu Din Muslim Community Ltd and a woman named Hanifa Nabuuma, who later became respondents in the case.
Their lawyers argued that the Registrar of Titles had followed proper procedures, insisting that “notices for public hearing leading to the cancellation of the titles” had been served physically. They also argued that ISBAT appealed too late to the minister of Lands, Judith Nabakooba and had no valid reason for the delay.
ISBAT strongly disputed this. It said it was never given notice of any hearing before its title was cancelled. The university called the Registrar’s action “illegal” and said it violated its constitutional right to a fair hearing.
ISBAT told the court that once it discovered what had happened, it spent months trying to resolve the matter administratively instead of rushing to court. It approached the Minister of Lands and the State House Anti Corruption Unit.
The State House team later investigated the complaint and concluded that the cancellation of ISBAT’s title was unlawful.
Ordinarily, anyone who wants to challenge a government decision through judicial review must file the case within three months. ISBAT missed this deadline, filing its application on September 29, 2025, more than two years after learning of the cancellation.
Court orders former Absa Bank worker to pay back Shs 67 million loan
Justice Kavuma said the law also gives courts power to extend time if there is “good reason”. She cited Section 40(7) of the Judicature Act, which says the three-month limit can be extended “unless the court has good reason for extending the period”.
In her ruling, she explained that courts must consider several factors, including the length of delay, the reasons for it, the seriousness of the case, any possible violations of rights, and the importance of the issues raised.
The judge accepted ISBAT’s explanation that it was pursuing administrative solutions. She noted that the university has been trying to engage different offices to have the matter resolved amicably however, all his efforts have proved futile”.
She also emphasised that the case raises serious questions about fairness and land administration. Justice Kavuma added that the right to a fair hearing is protected by the Constitution.
“A right to a fair hearing is a non-derogable right under Article 44 of the Constitution which makes it a fundamental right,” she wrote.
The judge concluded that the issues raised by ISBAT were of great public importance because they relate to “public administration and management of land registration which is of interest to the public.”
She therefore allowed the application and validated the already-filed judicial review case, meaning it will now be heard on its merits.
