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
Odeng Patrick Pius v Nanjing Hotel (Miscellaneous Application No. 481 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 219 (15 July 2025)
The High Court set aside a dismissal order, reinstating a commercial suit after finding sufficient cause and that counsel’s lapse should not prejudice the litigant.
Mulalira James and Others v Nantumbwe Olivie and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 4042 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 61 (15 July 2025)
The High Court extended expired letters of administration for one year and allowed late filing of an inventory in the estate of Edward Wakula Kibugo.
Rushfah Trading Co. Ltd v Chongqing International Construction Corporation Ltd and Bi-Energy General Trading LLC (Misc. Application No. 210 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 218 (15 July 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to stay execution of a consent judgment, finding no sufficient cause and holding the request was barred by res judicata and abuse of process.
Administrator General v Nabayunga Alex and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 4601 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 60 (15 July 2025)
The High Court granted the Administrator General leave to file an inventory out of time in an estate matter, finding sufficient cause for the delay.
Ssebwana Ronald Samuel and Others v Nakinga Christine and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1761 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 63 (15 July 2025)
The High Court granted a two-year extension of letters of administration for Francis Xavier Mutyaba’s estate, finding that administration was incomplete and beneficiaries had consented.
Yusuf Ssekakozi v Ssekakozi Yusuf and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 3720 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 62 (15 July 2025)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay in filing the inventory and final account, citing cultural practices, minority of beneficiaries, family disputes, and financial constraints as justifiable reasons beyond the applicant's control. The court held that the absence of operative letters of administration would leave the estate without legal representatives, impeding the finalization of administration. Applying the relevant statutory provisions and case law, the court exercised its discretion to grant an extension of the letters of administration for…
Source excerpt
Nuwagaba Tarasisi v Uganda (Criminal Application 30 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 519 (15 July 2025)
The court held that while the applicant had filed an appeal and attached the necessary documents, he failed to demonstrate any exceptional circumstances as required by law for the grant of bail pending appeal. The offence for which the applicant was convicted involved personal violence, and there was no evidence of grave illness, infancy, advanced age, or a certificate of no objection from the Director of Public Prosecutions. The court emphasized that the considerations for bail pending appeal are stricter than those for bail pending trial, and the applicant's submissions were more suited to…
Source excerpt
Semliki Rift Trading Co. Ltd v ETS. Kamanzi Limited (HCT-01-CV-MA-0035-2025) [2025] UGHC 525 (14 July 2025)
The Respondent, ETS. Kamanzi Limited, was ordered by the Court on 25th February 2025 to furnish Ug. Shs. 50,000,000 as security for costs within one month in Civil Suit No. 60 of 2024. The Respondent failed to comply with this order and did not file any response to the present application. The law under Order 26 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules is clear that failure to furnish security for costs within the prescribed time mandates dismissal of the suit. The Supreme Court in Banco Arabe Espanol vs. Bank of Uganda affirmed that the court's power to dismiss is automatic in such circumstanc…
Source excerpt
Kisembo v Mwesige and Another (HCT-01-LD-MA-0093-2024) [2025] UGHC 542 (14 July 2025)
High Court of Uganda judgment in Kisembo v Mwesige and Another, decided on 14 July 2025 and reported as [2025] UGHC 542.
Kireju and Others v Kahwa and Others (HCT-01-LD-MA-0043-2025) [2025] UGHC 545 (14 July 2025)
The court found that the suit had not abated because there was no evidence that the last written statement of defence (WSD) by the 1st Respondent was served on the Applicants, which is necessary to trigger the 28-day period for taking out summons for directions. Therefore, the application for amendment was not incompetent. The court further held that the proposed new defendants, Bakunda Matthew, Kyetunda Daudi, and Mark Kule, have a significant interest in the suit and their presence is necessary for the complete adjudication of the dispute over land ownership. The amendment does not introduc…
Source excerpt
