Residents and local leaders of Bugolobi’s Princess Anne Drive have secured a court order halting the construction of a multi-storied apartment block owned by Justice Julia Sebutinde, a Ugandan judge serving on the International Court of Justice (ICJ), after the High Court found that the dispute raises serious questions of legality under Uganda’s building laws.

In a ruling delivered by Registrar Kintu Simon Zirintusa in Miscellaneous Application No. 1106 of 2025, arising from High Court Civil Suit No. 470 of 2025, the court issued a temporary injunction stopping all further construction at Plot 8, Princess Anne Drive, Bugolobi, pending determination of the main suit.

The application was filed by Pius Bigirimana, a resident and neighboring property owner, who sued Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA), John Ssebutinde, Justice Julia Sebutinde, and the site overseer Joseph Wamala, challenging the legality of the four-storey commercial apartment structure in what is largely a residential area.

According to court records, the dispute dates back to 2022, when neighbors and the area LC1 leadership formally objected to the proposed development. The residents maintain that the KCCA Building Committee declined to approve the project, citing violations of the Building Control Act, 2013. Despite the objections, construction eventually commenced in August 2025.

The court heard that on 20 November 2025, KCCA issued a formal directive ordering an immediate halt to construction, but the order was allegedly ignored, with works continuing day and night.

In his ruling, Registrar Zirintusa found that the applicant had established a prima facie case, noting that whether the development required approval under the Building Control Act or the Physical Planning Act, and whether lawful approvals were obtained, are triable issues that must be determined in the main suit.

The court further held that the applicant would suffer irreparable injury if construction continued, citing evidence of noise, dust, mental anguish, and invasion of privacy, including overlooking of private living spaces by construction workers. The Registrar ruled that such harm cannot be adequately compensated by damages.

“The balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant,” the court held, ordering that the status quo be maintained and that no further construction continues.

The temporary injunction will remain in force for six months from January 12, 2026, subject to extension if necessary. Costs will be determined after disposal of the main suit.

Justice Sebutinde, who swore an affidavit in response on behalf of herself and her husband, argued that the structure was already roofed and near completion, but the court rejected this argument, stating that financial loss to the developers could be quantified, while harm to the residents could not.

The matter has reignited public debate over accountability among senior judicial officers, with residents questioning what recourse remains for ordinary citizens when alleged violations involve those entrusted with interpreting and upholding the law.

The substantive suit HCT-00CV-CS-0470-2025 remains pending before the High Court.