Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 2 court collections
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 03:47 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

25 Sept 2018

Land And Property [2018] EACJ 128

Ololosokwan Village Council and Others v Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania

Ololosokwan Village Council and Others v Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania [2018] EACJ 128 (25 September 2018) (First Instance Division)

Court: East African Court of Justice
Judge: Jundu JA, Mugenyi PJ, Ntezilyayo DPJ

The Court found that the formal application dated 21st September 2017 was unsupported by admissible affidavit evidence, rendering it incompetent and unsustainable under Rule 21(5) of the EACJ Rules. However, the latter, informally presented application for interim orders was admitted by consent and considered valid under Rule 21(7)(b). The Court held that the Reference raised serious triable issues regarding the legality of the Respondent's actions and potential violations of property rights and access to justice. The evidence established ongoing harassment and intimidation of village represe…

Source excerpt

Interim Injunctions
Eviction Disputes
Property Rights
Access To Justice
Administrative Directives
Affidavit Evidence

Read case analysis

23 Jun 2011

Commercial And Corporate [2011] UGCommC 47

Testimony Motors Ltd. v Commissioner Customs Uganda Revenue Authority

Testimony Motors Ltd. v Commissioner Customs Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Suit No. 4 of 2011) [2011] UGCommC 47 (23 June 2011)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Suit No. 4 of 2011

The High Court of Uganda lacks jurisdiction to interpret the East African Community Customs Management Act, 2005 for purposes of uniform application across partner states. While the Act is domesticated in Uganda and national courts may enforce its provisions, any interpretative jurisdiction is limited to enforcement and does not extend to resolving controversies over the meaning of provisions intended for regional uniformity. The questions raised by the applicant regarding the lawfulness of the Commissioner's directive and entitlement to refunds require interpretation of regional law, which i…