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
Masiko v Magara and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 39 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 108 (31 January 2025)
The High Court upheld the competence of a late-filed appeal, excluded time spent preparing certified records, and dismissed the appeal over taxation and costs.
Masiko v Magara and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 39 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 107 (31 January 2025)
The court found that the memorandum of appeal was filed within the statutory period when the time taken by the lower court to prepare and certify the record was excluded, as required by Section 79(2) CPA. The preliminary objection regarding competence of the appeal was overruled. On the merits, the court held that Smak Advocates' representation of the Respondents was not objected to by the parties, and the absence of a notice of instructions was a technicality that did not prejudice the Appellant. However, instruction fees and costs prior to the filing of instructions would not be recoverable…
Source excerpt
Global Center Limited v Price Costco International Inc. (Miscellaneous Application 766 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 81 (30 January 2024)
The High Court held that pending trademark opposition did not bar a passing off suit, and dismissed the application to strike out the plaint.
Alcon International Ltd v N.S.S.F & Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS 1255 of 1998) [2014] UGCommC 127 (3 September 2014)
The High Court ruled that Alcon International Limited (Uganda) was the plaintiff on record and struck Kampala Associated Advocates off the record for lack of instructions.
Navichandra v Kakubhai Kalidas & Co. Limited (Civil Appeal 10 of 1994) [1995] UGSC 32 (16 June 1995)
The Supreme Court held that the question of whether the respondent's advocates had authority to institute the suit was a matter of evidence and could not be determined at the preliminary stage based solely on assertions in pleadings and statements at the bar. The burden of proof lay on the appellant to establish lack of authority, which he failed to do. The trial judge was correct to overrule the preliminary objection, as lack of authority did not plainly appear and could only be resolved after hearing relevant evidence. The attempt to introduce fresh evidence on appeal was inadmissible. The…
Source excerpt
Navichandra Kakubhai Radia v Kakubhai And Co. Ltd [1995] UGSC 9 (16 June 1995)
The Supreme Court held that the preliminary objection regarding lack of authority for the respondent's advocates to institute the suit was premature. The appellant failed to adduce evidence supporting the allegation that the respondent's advocates lacked authority. The burden of proof lay on the appellant, who did not discharge it. The question of authority to sue is a matter of evidence and should be determined at trial, not at the preliminary stage, unless lack of authority is manifest. The trial judge was correct in overruling the objection and allowing the suit to proceed. Attempts to int…
Source excerpt
