The type of registration system in uganda is the torrent system,the torrent system can be defined as the

system that involves land registration and land transfer where the state creates and maintains a register
of land holdings.this system has two elements and this include; title by registration and the
indefensiblilty of title.

Title by registration is where the interests in the land are transfere by registration.this is also provided
for under section 54 of the registration of of Titles Act which provides that no instrument is effectual
untill it is registered and a certificate of title is acquired.this shows that only those that have legal
interests in the land with a certificate of title can be able to carry out any transactions on the particular
piece of land .

section 92(2) of the Registration of Titles Act is to the effect that upon registration of the transfer of the
estate all powers ,previleges there to shall pass to the transferee and the later shall thereby become the
registers proprietor.thiseams that as long as one accepts to carry out a transfer of interests in the land
to another person ,they need to carry the registration of transfer documents and then they will cease
being the registered proprietor of the land but instead the other person they have sold the land to.

Section 46 of the Registration of Titles Act provides for the effective date of registration and that is the
day that is marked by the registrar as the day for the start of process of registration.once the
registration has completed the registration process,then one is granted a certificate of title as evidence
that they are the registered proprietors of the particular piece of land and they are then able to carry
out any transactions on that land.

In Ndigjejjerawa v Kizito and Kubulwamwana ,it was held that no document or instrument can be
registered unless it fulfills the requirements and no instrument (however perfectly it fulfills the statutory
requirements) is effectual to transfer any interest in land unless it has been registered.

However before one acquires a title for the particular piece of land,there are supposed to carry out the
necessary investigation about the land that they intend to buy or register in their names.they are
supposed to carry out the in-depth due deligence to ensure that the land is eligible for registration.Due
deligence can be defined as the such a means of prudence , activity or assiduity as is properly to be
expected from or ordinarily exercised by a reasonable and prudent man under the particular
circumstances.

Due deligence on the land is carried out to ensure that,the land to be registered is either mailo,
leasehold or freehold type of land and to ensure the authenticity of of the particular land documents
that are presented as per the particular piece of land.One has to make sure that ,what is in the
documents corresponds that which they know and also check with the office of the registrar to confirm
the documents.

This is known as the curtain principle where one carries out investigations on the past occupants and
transactions carried out on the land on the land they are purchasing or registering.This is to ensure that
before one registers a particular piece of land has the necessary requirements for registration and to
acquire certainty on the status of the land and on the certificate of title acquired after it's registration.
Indefensiblilty of title ,this is the second feature of the torrent system which can be defined as a way as
through which the government protects the registered proprietors of an estate or interests in land from
any rival claims of ownership to the land .this was a principle developed by professor Whalam who
describes it as a mosaic of sections.

This principle is also very evident in the Registration of Titles Act under various sections,for
examples ,section 59 of the Registration of Titles Act provides that a certificate of Title is conclusive
evidence of ownership.this is to the effect that as long as one holds a certificate of title pertaining to a
particular piece of land,then they're taken as the registered proprietors of the particular piece of land .in
Nafula v Kayanja,the court held that a certificate of title is conclusive evidence of ownership of land.

Section 64 of the Registration of Titles Act provides that the title of the registered proprietor is
paramount .this means that incase of any other rival claims on the interests of that particular land ,the
legal interests of the registered proprietor will always prevail.

Section 176 of the Registration of Titles Act provides that a registered proprietor can not be ejected or
suffer any action of damages on the land.the certificate of title gives assurance that one's rights over
ownership of property are well protected by the government and incase they're ejected,then it will be
violation of their right of ownership of property as provided for under Article 26 of the constitution.

Section181 of the Registration of Titles Act provides for the protection of the bonafide purchaser for
value without notice who purchased or obtained the land from one registers through fraud.

A bonafide purchaser for value without notice was defined in the case of samuel Kizito mubiru v
Byensiba and another HCC No.513 of 1982 where a bonafide purchaser for value was defined to mean
good faith and honesty without fraud or wrongdoing.this means that if one acquires land and is
registered as the proprietor of the above land with out any notice that it acquired fraudulently,the
government renders them protection because they were not party to the fraudulent transactions that
took place .

However ,though the certificate of title of a registered proprietor is indefeasible,there are various
exceptions to this principle where the certificate of title of the registered proprietor can be tampered
with in order to ascertain the exact owner or so that different transactions are carried on the land.this
exceptions include;fraud, adverse possession, statutory exceptions among others.

Fraud ,this can be defined as in Frederick J .K Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd Civil Appeal No.4 of 2006 as
anything calculated to deceive by a single act or suppression of the truth through the suggestion of what
is false .section 64 of the Registration of Titles Act provides that the title to the registered proprietor is
paramount except for fraud.

However one has to prove the following elements to prove that indeed there was fraud;(i) Dishonesty in
the transactions.this is where one act in a dishonest manner to deceive the other during the
transactions.in Katarikawe v katwiremu and another court held that fraud though not defined covers
dishonest dealings in land.
(ii)thereust be an intention to cheat and in the case of Frederick Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd ,court stated
that fraud is anything calculated to deceive,whether by a single act or suppression of the truth and
(iii)the person mist have participated in the fraudulent act and in Kampala Bottlers Ltd v Dominico CA
No.22/92 it was stated that the transferee must be guilty of some fraudulent act o must have known of
such act by another and took advantage of it and they have to prove fraud beyond a balance of
probability.

The title of a registered proprietor is not indefeasible as against that of another proprietor claiming the
same land .section 64 of the Registration of Titles Act is to the effect that the registered proprietor may
hold the land subject to encumbrances notified on the folium but free from all other encumbrances
except the estate of a person claiming the same land under a prior certificate of title.

In this circumstance where two legal interests are competing that is the two certificates of title are
competing and both are presented,the legal interests that were first registered will be considered that is
,the date of registration of the and issuing of the certificate of title is considered to be valid to the rest
and the person in hold of it becomes the registered proprietor of the land.

Adverse possession,this can be defined as where a person takes possession of another person's land
without the consent of the registered proprietor.in this circumstance,if the registered proprietor does
not eject an intruder off their land for a period of 12 years then he or she loses title to such intruders.

However there are two elements to be proved for one to conclude that there was adverse possession of
their land ;(i) the possession of the defendant should become adverse to the plaintiff and (ii) the
defendant mist continue to remain in possession of the land for a period of 12 years.

in Rwanjuma v Jingo Mukasa (Civil Suit -2012 /508) 2015 UGHCLD 26 ( 23 June 2015) where it stated that
anyone who posses the land without consent of the registered owner is an adverse possession and it
confers title to the adverse possesser if the registered owner does enforce his right of possession and
allows the adverse possesser to continue in occupation for a period of 12 years.

There are also statutory exceptions ,where the acts of parliament allow for the use of a particular piece
of land even if it is registered in another person's names by the government.for example the Roads Act
which empowers the land owner without access to a road to apply for a court order for a right of way
over the registered proprietors of the land.

In conclusion therefore