Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
Rak Ceramics & Sanitary Ware Ltd and Others v Bank of Baroda (U) Ltd (Civil Suit No. 0898 of 2024; Miscellaneous Application 1609 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 65 (12 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for unconditional leave to defend a summary suit over a loan recovery claim, finding no bona fide triable issue.
Suleiman v African Union and African Union Commission (Ruling) (Application No. 014/2024) [2025] AfCHPR 5 (12 February 2025)
The African Court held that it lacked jurisdiction over an application against the African Union and its Commission, because they are not State Parties to the Protocol.
Sgt. Byamugisha Felix v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 2 of 2008) [2025] UGHRC 7 (11 February 2025)
The tribunal found that the applicant's testimony, corroborated by his wife and medical evidence, established on a balance of probabilities that he was subjected to severe physical assault, humiliation, and degrading treatment by Regimental Policemen on the orders of Major Nelson Mugerwa. Internal UPDF reports admitted excessive force was used. The acts constituted torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment as defined by international and domestic law. The respondent, as the employer, was vicariously liable for the actions of its agents. The right to freedom from torture is absolute…
Source excerpt
Onyango v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application 86 of 2024) [2025] UGHCACD 2 (11 February 2025)
A High Court Anti-Corruption Division judgment in Miscellaneous Application 86 of 2024. The available extract contains no substantive decision text for summary.
Uganda v Natukunda & Another (Criminal Session 344 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 43 (11 February 2025)
The court found that the prosecution proved all four ingredients of murder beyond reasonable doubt. The postmortem report confirmed the death and cause as severe burns and sepsis. The death was unlawful and caused with malice aforethought, as evidenced by the extensive and targeted injuries. The accused were placed in proximity to the deceased by their own admissions and by the evidence of witnesses. The dying declarations made by the deceased to two independent witnesses identified both accused as the perpetrators. The court found the dying declarations credible, corroborated by circumstanti…
Source excerpt
Batambuze v Ataro (Civil Application 512 of 2024) [2025] UGCA 29 (11 February 2025)
The court found that the applicant had filed an appeal with a likelihood of success and that execution of the High Court decree would render the appeal nugatory and cause substantial loss. The court was satisfied that the application for stay was made without undue delay, as the applicant had first sought a stay in the High Court, which was dismissed, and promptly filed the present application. The court noted that there was no evidence that the respondent was not impecunious or that she had sufficient property within the jurisdiction to satisfy a potential refund if the appeal succeeded. The…
Source excerpt
Lunkuse & Another v Nassali (Miscellaneous Application 671 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 29 (11 February 2025)
The High Court Land Division dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no arguable grounds and holding that the trial judge properly relied on counsel’s mistake principle.
Uganda v Ogentho (Criminal Session 308 of 2021) [2025] UGHCCRD 13 (11 February 2025)
Criminal Session 308 of 2021: Uganda v Ogentho, decided by the High Court Criminal Division on 11 February 2025. The supplied record contains no extractable judgment text.
Uganda v Senoga (Criminal Confirmation 2 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 46 (11 February 2025)
The High Court revised a magistrate’s sentence for stealing a motorcycle, holding the four-year default term was illegal and separating compensation from the fine.
Katabarwa v Wakisa and 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application 78 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 99 (10 February 2025)
The court found that the application was fundamentally flawed as it sought to reinstate Civil Suit No.151 of 2022, a suit that did not exist between the parties. The correct course would have been to apply for reinstatement of Miscellaneous Application No.046 of 2024, which itself sought to set aside the dismissal of Civil Suit No.60 of 2023. The applicant and her counsel repeatedly cited and submitted on the wrong suit, resulting in a fatal procedural error. The court held that no sufficient cause was shown for reinstatement, and the application was both incompetent and devoid of merit. Cons…
Source excerpt
