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
Ntambara v Segawole (Miscellaneous Application No. 1082 of 2019) [2020] UGCommC 5 (7 February 2020)
The High Court granted a final adjournment in an application to set aside an ex parte judgment, citing repeated absence by the applicant and awarding costs to the respondent.
Ololosokwan Village Council and Ors. v A.G. of The United Republic of Tanzania (Reference 10 of 2017) [2019] EACJ 7 (6 March 2019) (First Instance Division)
The Court dismissed an adjournment application, holding that the applicants had not shown sufficient reasons or hardship in securing an expert witness.
Aloyo v Ogwok (Civil Suit (originating Summons) No. 10 of 2013) [2014] UGHCFD 27 (29 April 2014)
The High Court adjourned an originating summons to allow a pending security-for-costs application to be determined first in a foreign judgment registration matter.
Obiga Mario Kania Vs. Electoral Commission & Anor (Election Pet. No. 003 of 2011) [2011] UGHC 69 (4 June 2011)
The High Court of Uganda dismissed an election petition for want of prosecution after refusing an adjournment and a recusal request based on alleged bias.
Standard Chartered Bank (U) Ltd v Sirajji Kasumbakali (High Court Civil (Originating Summons) No. 1 of 2009) (HCT-00-CC-OS 1 of 2009) [2009] UGCommC 12 (8 April 2009)
The High Court adjourned the matter, ordered personal service on Aisha Musiime, fixed the case for scheduling, and made no order as to costs.
Musinguzi v Amama Mbabazi & Anor (Election Petition No. HCT-05-CV-EPA-0003 of 2001) [2002] UGHC 3 (8 February 2002)
High Court directions in an election petition on witness scheduling, day-to-day hearing, and adjournment. The court rejected an adjournment request based on counsel’s external commitments.
Kereni v Kidega and 2 Others (Kereni v Kidega and 2 Others) [1996] UGHC 14 (26 April 1996)
The High Court refused an adjournment request after finding no sufficient cause, and dismissed the suit for want of prosecution with costs to the second and third defendants.
