Uganda Case Law

Kireju and Others v Kahwa and Others (HCT-01-LD-MA-0043-2025)

Kireju and Others v Kahwa and Others (HCT-01-LD-MA-0043-2025) [2025] UGHC 545 (14 July 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-01-LD-MA-0043-2025

Judge

Wagona, J

The court found that the suit had not abated because there was no evidence that the last written statement of defence (WSD) by the 1st Respondent was served on the Applicants, which is necessary to trigger the 28-day period for taking out summons for directions. Therefore, the application for amendment was not incompetent. The court further held that the proposed new defendants, Bakunda Matthew, Kyetunda Daudi, and Mark Kule, have a significant interest in the suit and their presence is necessary for the complete adjudication of the dispute over land ownership. The amendment does not introduc…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Joinder Of Parties
• Abatement Of Suit
• Land Ownership Disputes

Samwuel Galiwango and Others v Edith Nalwanga and Others (Misc. Application No. 278 of 2025)

Samwuel Galiwango and Others v Edith Nalwanga and Others (Misc. Application No. 278 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 37 (4 July 2025)

Court

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc. Application No. 278 of 2025

Judge

Busingye, J

The High Court allowed substitution and amendment in a succession-related suit, replacing deceased parties with their administrators and striking out a deceased plaintiff.

• Letters Of Administration
• Substitution Of Parties
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Estate Management
• Survival Of Cause Of Action
• Substitution-of-parties

Lubega Ahmed Kasumba and Others v Badda Elaisha Grace and Nankya Justine

Lubega Ahmed Kasumba and Others v Badda Elaisha Grace and Nankya Justine (Miscellaneous Application No. 141 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 477 (4 July 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 141 of 2024

Judge

Bukirwa, J

The court found that the affidavit in support of the application was valid, as the written authorisation given to the 1st applicant by the 2nd-5th applicants covered all proceedings arising from the main suit, and modern precedent holds that affidavits are evidence and do not require authorisation but rather knowledge of the deponent. However, the court held that the application to amend the defence, counterclaim, and witness statements was devoid of merit. The applicants sought to change their claim from adverse possession to purchase of the suit land after the respondents had closed their c…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Affidavit Authority
• Adverse Possession
• Purchase Of Land

Bethel Lunize Kigongo v Ssemwanga Joseph and Others (Misc. Application No. 1013 of 2024)

Bethel Lunize Kigongo v Ssemwanga Joseph and Others (Misc. Application No. 1013 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 198 (30 June 2025)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Misc. Application No. 1013 of 2024

Judge

Susan Odongo, J

The court found that the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for leave to amend the plaint, as the original pleadings failed to adequately particularize allegations of fraud and illegality due to the negligence of former counsel. The court emphasized that amendments are permissible at any stage to ensure the real issues are determined, provided no injustice is occasioned to the other party, and any prejudice can be compensated by costs. The absence of any opposition or affidavit in reply from the respondents indicated no demonstrated prejudice. Regarding service, the court accepted the ap…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Substituted Service
• Fraud In Land Disputes

Kasasira Mutabazi and 5 Others v Kiwanuka Wakabi and Another

Kasasira Mutabazi and 5 Others v Kiwanuka Wakabi and Another (miscellaneous Application no.1127/2025) [2025] UGHCLD 114 (27 June 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

miscellaneous Application no.1127/2025

Judge

Kaahwa, J

The application to amend the plaint to enhance the value of the subject matter does not meet the principles governing amendment of pleadings, particularly as set out in Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd vs Obene. The court found that the reason for amendment—effluxion of time resulting in increased land value—is common knowledge and does not justify amendment of pleadings. Allowing such amendments would encourage undeserving applications, constitute an abuse of court process, and impede the court's duty to curtail delays. The application was found to be mala fide and not brought in good faith…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Valuation Of Land
• Compensation Claims

Mujurizi James v Byakatonda John and Muyingo Robert

Mujurizi James v Byakatonda John and Muyingo Robert (Miscellaneous Application 137 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 469 (26 June 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 137 of 2025

Judge

Godfrey Himbaza, J

The court found that the applicant's proposed amendments sought to introduce prayers that had already been litigated and dismissed, with an appeal pending in the Court of Appeal. Entertaining the same issues in the present application would amount to forum shopping and was improper. The applicant failed to provide credible evidence that the plaintiff died before judgment, and the respondent's evidence was accepted. The court held that consequential orders for cancellation of title could not be granted in the absence of a judgment in the applicant's favour, and some of the properties were now…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Ex Parte Judgment
• Consequential Orders
• Letters Of Administration
• Cancellation Of Title
• Substitution Of Parties

Rich Dad Junior School v Dumba Mayanja and 4 Others

Rich Dad Junior School v Dumba Mayanja and 4 Others (Civil Appeal No. OO42 of 2023) [2025] UGHCLD 109 (24 June 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Appeal No. OO42 of 2023

Judge

Alividza, J

The court found that the appellant was properly served with the amended plaint and hearing notices through its head teacher and advocates, and that its counsel participated in the proceedings, including adopting the joint scheduling memorandum and filing a written statement of defence. The court held that the appellant was estopped from denying service or participation, and that the trial magistrate was correct to proceed ex parte after the appellant failed to attend hearings. The adoption of the defence was proper given the appellant's involvement and representation. The award of general dam…

Source excerpt

• Trespass To Land
• Service Of Process
• Exparte Judgment
• Amendment Of Pleadings

Semitala and Another v Ssemugabi and 5 Others

Semitala and Another v Ssemugabi and 5 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 0246 of 2025) [2025] UGHCLD 101 (24 June 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 0246 of 2025

Judge

Kaahwa, J

The High Court Land Division declined to consolidate two land suits over the same plot, finding the later suit replicated the earlier one and that amendment was the proper course.

• Consolidation Of Suits
• Land Ownership Dispute
• Trespass
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Consolidation-of-suits
• Land-disputes

Kasozi Jand Another v Registered Trustees of Kampala Archdiocese (Mtsc. Application No. 905 of 2021)

Kasozi Jand Another v Registered Trustees of Kampala Archdiocese (Mtsc. Application No. 905 of 2021) [2025] UGHC 452 (23 June 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Mtsc. Application No. 905 of 2021

Judge

Echookit, J

The High Court allowed leave to amend a defence and file a counterclaim out of time in a land dispute, with costs to abide the outcome of the suit.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Counterclaim Out Of Time
• Ownership Of Land
• Multiplicity Of Proceedings
• Amendment-of-pleadings
• Counterclaim

Karungi Elizabeth v Cairo Bank Uganda Limited and Kkingo Parents’ Transporters Company Ltd

Karungi Elizabeth v Cairo Bank Uganda Limited and Kkingo Parents’ Transporters Company Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 303 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 187 (23 June 2025)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 303 of 2025

Judge

Dr. Ginamia Melody Ngwatu, J

The court found that the issues raised in the application and the main suit had already been litigated and determined in Masaka High Court Civil Suit No. 20/2022 between the same parties regarding the same subject matter. The applicant's attempt to amend the plaint in the present suit was an abuse of court process, as it sought to re-litigate matters already decided, merely adding a new party (the bank) as a cosmetic change. The doctrine of res judicata, as codified in Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and interpreted in relevant case law, precluded the court from entertaining the applicat…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Res Judicata
• Breach Of Contract
• Sale Of Goods