A high-profile commercial dispute between prominent Kampala law firm Muwema & Co. Advocates and property owner Downtown Investments Ltd continues to unfold in Uganda’s courts, centred on a prime Kololo premises, alleged rent arrears, a contested option to purchase, a dramatic eviction, and competing multi-billion-shilling claims.

The conflict traces back to a lease agreement signed in December 2014 for Plot 50 Windsor Crescent Road in Kololo. Under the terms, Muwema & Co. Advocates occupied the property at an initial monthly rent of approximately USD 5,000 plus VAT, subject to periodic increments. The lease included an option for the firm to purchase the property.

Relations deteriorated over time. Downtown Investments Ltd sued in 2023 (High Court Civil Suit No. 621 of 2023), claiming persistent rent defaults and continued occupation after the lease period. The landlord sought vacant possession, recovery of arrears, mesne profits, and damages.

On 20 February 2026, Justice Patricia Mutesi of the High Court Commercial Division ruled in favour of Downtown Investments. The court ordered Muwema & Co. Advocates (together with partners Fred Muwema and Friday Kagoro) to pay USD 148,300 in rent arrears, USD 224,000 in mesne profits for wrongful occupation, and UGX 50 million in general damages, plus interest and costs — a total exceeding Shs 1.4 billion. The firm was also directed to hand over vacant possession of the premises.

The court rejected the law firm’s argument that it had validly exercised an option to purchase the property in August 2021 with an offer of USD 1.05 million based on market valuation. Justice Mutesi held that the offer was not accepted in an absolute and unqualified manner, that the firm remained a tenant in breach, and that it had no continuing legal interest entitling it to stay on the property.

Muwema & Co. Advocates strongly disputed the ruling. In a press statement, the firm cited factual and legal inconsistencies, argued that the court overlooked evidence of a USD 130,000 payment made during mediation toward the claimed arrears, and challenged the award of mesne profits. Senior Counsel Fred Muwema has maintained that the dispute is fundamentally about a failed property transaction rather than simple rent default, stating that once the option to purchase was exercised, the firm ceased to be a tenant and became a purchaser in waiting. The firm also claimed it had invested significantly in renovations to the premises.

On 6 March 2026, court bailiffs, supported by police, enforced the vacant possession order and evicted the firm from the Kololo offices. Furniture, files, equipment and the firm’s signage were removed. The Uganda Law Society later criticised the manner of the eviction, alleging procedural breaches, including the absence of a proper warrant and concerns over the handling of sensitive client materials. Muwema & Co. described the action as unlawful “re-entry” rather than lawful execution of a court order.

The firm has since relocated to Plot 40 Nakasero Road and filed a fresh High Court suit seeking more than Shs 15 billion in compensation. It claims the eviction caused business losses, damage to property and reputation, interference with confidential client files, and the disappearance of cash (reportedly USD 250,000 and UGX 37 million). Defendants in that suit include Downtown Investments Ltd, its director, lawyers involved, security personnel, a security company, and the Attorney General.

Meanwhile, the appeal against the February 2026 judgment continues. In August 2026, the Court of Appeal granted a partial stay of execution of the monetary aspects of the High Court decree, on condition that Muwema & Co. Advocates deposit USD 100,000 as security for costs within one month. The court declined to reverse the already-executed eviction.

The case highlights the complexities of commercial lease disputes involving options to purchase, the enforcement of court orders, and the intersection of property rights with professional practice. Both sides continue to contest key factual and legal questions, with the Court of Appeal and the new damages claim still pending.

As the matter progresses through the appellate and civil courts, it remains a closely watched dispute in Kampala’s legal and business communities.