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
Kyamugisha v Mutungo Executive Hotel Ltd and Uganda Revenue Authority (CIVIL SUIT NO. 285 OF 2019) [2025] UGHC 181 (14 April 2025)
The High Court held that a probationary URA employee was lawfully dismissed after background checks, and dismissed claims against both defendants.
Sarah Mazzi Wamala and Jonathan Baddokwaya v White House Holdings Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 2642 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 155 (14 April 2025)
The court found that the affidavit in support of the application, though sworn by only the 2nd applicant without written authority from the 1st applicant, was competent because both applicants were involved in the transaction and the evidence would not differ. The court emphasized substantive justice over technicalities. On the merits, the applicants raised bona fide triable issues regarding whether the loan sum was disbursed and received, the legality and excessiveness of the interest rate, and the validity of the guarantees. Contradictions in the amounts and dates of the loans, as well as d…
Source excerpt
Millennium Tiles (U) Limited v Kampala Tile Market Limited (Miscellaneous Application 472 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 57 (14 April 2025)
The High Court held that the respondent failed to serve summons and plaint within time and had no record of an extension, so the suit stood dismissed and the application was allowed.
Ariong v Uganda (criminal miscellaneous Application 104 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 224 (14 April 2025)
__CONTENT_FILTERED__
Source excerpt
Tumuhairwe and Another v Tumwebaze Mugasha (Civil Suit 102 of 2020) [2025] UGHCFD 15 (14 April 2025)
The court found that the defendant, as administrator, failed in her fiduciary duties by not accounting for substantial estate funds, including the balance in the deceased's bank account and proceeds from property sales. The evidence showed the defendant misappropriated estate assets and did not distribute them in accordance with the Succession Act. The defendant's claim that certain properties and funds were jointly owned was rejected based on documentary and testimonial evidence, particularly the bank account, which was solely in the deceased's name. The court held that the defendant's actio…
Source excerpt
Daniel Kyamugisha v Mutungo Executive Hotel Ltd and Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Suit No. 285 of 2019) [2025] UGHC 293 (14 April 2025)
The plaintiff was employed by the 2nd defendant on a probationary contract that expressly allowed for termination without notice or hearing upon unfavorable background checks. The 2nd defendant conducted background checks, including soliciting information from the 1st defendant, which led to the plaintiff's dismissal. The court found that the contract was a probationary one as defined by the Employment Act, and the dismissal was lawful under both the contract and the statute. The plaintiff was given an opportunity to respond to the allegations, satisfying the requirements of natural justice u…
Source excerpt
Bugingo and Others v Sserunkuma and Others (Civil Suit 102 of 2022) [2025] UGHCFD 14 (14 April 2025)
The High Court held that the disputed Bulwa property belonged to Philomena Arombo Obol’s estate, invalidated later dealings, and cancelled the lease to the 3rd defendant.
Kabugo v Muwonge (Civil Application 210 of 2024) [2025] UGCA 102 (14 April 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that the application for interim stay was barred by res judicata because stay had already been determined by the High Court.
Uganda v Oriokot (Criminal Session 182 of 2021) [2025] UGHC 179 (14 April 2025)
__CONTENT_FILTERED__
Source excerpt
Omiat v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 71 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 225 (14 April 2025)
The court held that although the applicant demonstrated a fixed place of abode and presented substantial sureties, the gravity of the offence, the applicant's age, and allegations of prior threats to the deceased and his family created a real possibility of interference with prosecution witnesses. The court emphasized that the applicant failed to satisfy the requirement that he would not interfere with witnesses if released on bail. The absence of opposition from the respondent did not relieve the applicant of the burden to prove entitlement to bail. The interest of justice, therefore, requir…
Source excerpt
