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
Semanja Godfrey v Moses Mawagali Lusalabaga and Others (Civil Suit 336 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 369 (30 April 2025)
The High Court struck out an amended plaint for going beyond leave to remove only two defendants, holding the unauthorized changes breached the court order.
Amazon Enterprises Limited and Another v Byabagambe and Another (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 2898 OF 2024) [2025] UGHC 243 (30 April 2025)
The High Court held that Civil Suit No. 764 of 2024 was res judicata because the same land dispute had already been finally decided in Civil Appeal No. 63 of 2020.
Ntege v Tomusange Lasito and Others (MISC. APPLICATION NO 951 OF 2024) [2025] UGHC 245 (30 April 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to review a prior judgment, finding the relied-upon inventory was irrelevant or post-dated the decision and that a pending appeal barred review.
Archstone Solutions Ltd v Mutukula Regional Market Ltd and Karamagi Karim (Civil Suit 316 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 113 (30 April 2025)
The court determined that the Special Conditions Clause 25.4 of the contract, which provides for arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, prevails over the general dispute resolution clause. The inclusion of an arbitration clause indicates the parties' intention for disputes to be resolved by arbitration, and courts must respect this choice. As such, the court's jurisdiction is ousted, and the matter must be referred to arbitration. The suit is therefore stayed and referred to arbitration, with each party bearing its own costs.
Source excerpt
Akankwasa v Bitarabeho & 2 Others (Civil Appeal 16 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 260 (29 April 2025)
The court held that neither the Appellant nor the Respondents could claim ownership of the suit land because the estate of the late Semei Kabonyi had not been administered in accordance with the law. No letters of administration had been obtained, and any distribution or occupation of the land by family members was legally ineffective in conferring ownership. The Appellant's claim for declarations of ownership and trespass failed because, under Section 187 of the Succession Act, no right to any part of the property of a person who died intestate can be established in court without a grant of…
Source excerpt
Karungi & Partners Advocates and Solicitors v Nadya Dimitrova Mileva (Misc. Application No. 0710 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 78 (29 April 2025)
The court found that the Applicant had probable cause to commence proceedings without the statutory one-month waiting period, as the Respondent was imminently leaving Uganda. An implied retainer existed between the parties, evidenced by instructions, payments, and conduct, despite the absence of a signed written agreement. The Applicant was not entitled to tax a bill for services under the civil suit, as the agreed fees had been substantially paid, but was granted leave to tax the advocate-client bill of costs for services rendered in the mediation cause, which was outside the original scope…
Source excerpt
Nabukalu Florence v Ssemwanga Godfrey Lule (Miscellaneous Cause 4 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 363 (29 April 2025)
The court found that the applicant is the biological mother of the minor and that the minor is the registered owner of the property in question. The minor, being under 18 years of age, cannot legally transact regarding his property, necessitating the appointment of a guardian. The evidence established that the applicant has been solely responsible for the child's welfare due to the respondent's violent and irresponsible conduct. The court held that the applicant's request to rent out the property and use the proceeds for the child's welfare and education is in the best interests of the child,…
Source excerpt
Byanso v Namuwawu and Others (Application 38004 of 2024) [2025] UGRSB 10 (29 April 2025)
The Registrar found that the applicant’s signature was forged on a company resolution, expunged the resulting registration entries, and set aside his removal as director.
Mugisha v Nsabiyumva (Civil Appeal 8 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 261 (29 April 2025)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a taxation ruling, holding that leave was not required under the Civil Procedure Rules because the Advocates Act governs the appeal.
Namayanja and Others v Cavendish University Uganda (LABOUR DISPUTE REFERENCE No.097 OF 2019) [2025] UGIC 34 (29 April 2025)
The court found that while the Respondent had a legitimate basis to restructure following the NCHE report, it failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements under Section 80 of the Employment Act and Regulation 44 of the Employment Regulations. The Claimants were not given adequate notice or consulted about the restructuring and its direct impact on their employment, as required by law. Their contracts were renewed during the restructuring period, and their terminations occurred five months after the process had concluded, undermining the Respondent's claim that the terminations…
Source excerpt
