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
Decisions matching the current search
Bukera and 4 Others v Kabenge (Misc.Application No.O913 of 2023) [2025] UGHCLD 105 (27 June 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for suspension and a mandatory injunction, finding the dispute over an access road had been overtaken by events.
Joseph Kasozi Lubega and Others v Kaggwa Sonko (Civil Appeal 123 of 2023) [2025] UGHCLD 67 (2 June 2025)
The High Court found that the respondent lawfully acquired the suit Kibanja through a sale from Bukenya Muhammad, who had previously purchased it from John Lubega. The absence of the buyer's signature on the 1981 sale agreement did not invalidate the transaction, as the conduct of the parties and subsequent possession by the respondent evidenced mutual assent and part performance. The court held that the respondent established sufficient possession by commencing construction and maintaining presence on the land, as corroborated by oral evidence and the locus in quo visit. The appellants' acti…
Source excerpt
Kato Paul Nakabale v Kiggundu Kizza (Civil Appeal 128 of 2023) [2025] UGHCLD 71 (15 May 2025)
The High Court dismissed an appeal over an access road dispute, holding the appellant had not proved exclusive ownership and the respondent was not a trespasser.
Namatovu v Bukenya (Miscellaneous Application 2870 of 2024) [2024] UGHCLD 291 (9 December 2024)
The High Court declined to strike out a plaint alleging blocked access to kibanja land, holding that the cause of action issue needed evidence at trial.
Kyakuhaire v Wokuri (Miscellaneous Application 807 of 2024) [2024] UGHCLD 156 (4 June 2024)
The court found that Daniel Muwonge Mugwanya, as the alleged new owner in possession of the suit land and the person who blocked the applicant's access road, has a direct interest in the subject matter of Civil Suit No.842 of 2022. His presence is necessary for the complete and effectual adjudication of all questions in the suit and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. The court held that adding him as a defendant does not introduce a new cause of action, as the applicant's claim remains for an access road. The court exercised its discretion under Order 1 rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Ru…
Source excerpt
Kwebeiha v Babirye and 4 Others (Civil Suit 216 of 2017) [2024] UGHCLD 110 (26 April 2024)
The court found that although the access road in question was not planned or gazetted, it existed and was used by the defendants prior to the dispute. The plaintiff himself created the current access road after blocking the original one, and both parties have used it to access their respective properties. The evidence did not establish that the access road was officially gazetted, but the necessity for access to the defendants' plots justified the continued use of the road. Applying the doctrine of way of necessity and the principle of implied easement, the court held that the defendants are…
Source excerpt
Mulondo v Namara and Another (Civil Suit 184 of 2017) [2023] UGHCLD 271 (23 August 2023)
The High Court held that the defendants unlawfully blocked the plaintiff’s access road and trespassed by encroaching on his land, awarding damages, injunction, and demolition orders.
Kavuma v Mbabazi (Civil Appeal 12 of 2022) [2023] UGHCLD 196 (11 July 2023)
The High Court set aside a land appeal judgment after finding a serious conflict-of-interest irregularity involving the respondent’s counsel, and ordered mediation or retrial.
Turyakira v Kirya and 4 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1642 of 2022) [2023] UGHCLD 32 (14 February 2023)
The court found that the consent judgment between the applicant and the 1st respondent was premised on a mutual mistake regarding the correct access road to the applicant's property. However, the applicant delayed in seeking review, and the 1st respondent had already executed the judgment, incurring significant costs and altering the property. The doctrine of laches applied, preventing the applicant from claiming as an aggrieved party. The court held that while the consent judgment was based on a mistake, setting it aside would unfairly prejudice the 1st respondent, who had complied in good f…
Source excerpt
Twinomuriisa v Mugume (Miscellaneous Application No. 2127 of 2021) [2022] UGHCLD 96 (4 February 2022)
The court found that the Respondent's affidavit in reply was filed within the statutory period, overruling the preliminary objection. On the issue of service, the court held that the Applicant failed to prove non-service on the balance of probabilities, and the affidavit of service was given the benefit of the doubt. Regarding the cause of action, the court determined that the plaint disclosed a valid cause of action as the Respondent was deprived of access to the suit land, which he used as an access road, and the suit was neither frivolous nor vexatious. On security for costs, the court hel…
Source excerpt
