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
Barigye v Equity Bank Uganda Limited (Miscellaneous Cause 45 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 16 (14 February 2025)
The court held that freezing the applicant’s bank account was unlawful because the bank failed to justify the freeze and did not comply with AML reporting duties.
Cairo International Bank Limited v Luyimbazi (Civil Suit 555 of 2018) [2024] UGCommC 298 (19 April 2024)
The High Court held that the defendant breached a cheque discounting arrangement and owed the bank Ug.shs. 90,780,076, plus damages, interest, and costs.
KCB Bank Uganda v Alinda (Civil Appeal 37 of 2018) [2024] UGHCCD 22 (29 January 2024)
The High Court found that the trial magistrate properly evaluated the evidence, including expert reports and the Electoral Commission letter, and was justified in rejecting inconclusive or untested evidence linking the respondent to fraud. The court affirmed that the bank-customer relationship imposes a fiduciary duty on the bank to exercise due care and diligence, and that a finding of negligence could arise from breach of this duty even if not explicitly pleaded. The appellant, having alleged fraud, bore the burden of proving it to a higher standard than the ordinary balance of probabilitie…
Source excerpt
Victoria Candles Limited v Bank of Africa Uganda Limited (Misc Cause 284 of 2023) [2023] UGHCCD 356 (19 December 2023)
The High Court held that the bank unlawfully froze and reversed Victoria Candles Limited’s account funds without complying with anti-money-laundering reporting duties.
Formular Feeds Limited and 3 Others v KCB Bank Limited [2023] UGSC 35 (13 October 2023)
The Supreme Court upheld a bank’s loan claim despite an illegal mortgage, finding the debt and guaranties remained enforceable and dismissing the appeal.
Post Bank Uganda Limited v Egesa (Civil Appeal No.007 of 2019) [2023] UGHCCD 272 (18 September 2023)
The appellate court found that the trial magistrate erred in holding the bank liable for the unauthorized ATM withdrawals. The evidence established that the respondent's ATM card and PIN were used for the disputed transactions, and the respondent failed to promptly notify the bank of the loss of his card. The bank had fulfilled its duty by issuing the card and PIN according to established guidelines and had no reasonable basis to suspect unauthorized access absent notification or red flags. The court held that the burden of proof remained with the respondent to show he did not authorize the t…
Source excerpt
Kasigwa v KCB Bank Uganda Limited (Civil Suit 478 of 2020) [2023] UGCommC 184 (21 February 2023)
The High Court held that KCB Bank Uganda unlawfully debited Sam Kasigwa’s account, breached the banker-customer relationship, and owed him compensation.
Mushari v DFCU Bank Limited (by substitution) (Civil Appeal No. 188 of 2013) [2022] UGCA 222 (9 August 2022)
The Court of Appeal allowed a second appeal over disputed bank withdrawals, finding errors in the first appellate court’s treatment of the mandate, handwriting evidence, and costs.
Atiku v Centenary Rural Development Bank Limited (Civil Suit 754 of 2020) [2022] UGCommC 146 (18 July 2022)
The court dismissed a bank customer’s claim over alleged unauthorized mobile banking withdrawals, finding she had signed up for the service and bore the loss.
Planbuild Technical Services Limited v DFCU Bank Limited and Another (H.C.Miscellaneous Application No. 913 of 2018) [2021] UGCommC 40 (24 August 2021)
The court found that the applicant failed to prove any fraud, misrepresentation, duress, or undue influence in the signing of the consent judgment. The evidence showed that the applicant had access to all relevant bank statements and was fully aware of the financial position before entering into the consent. The alleged threats and pressure were found to be normal consequences of default under a loan agreement and did not amount to illegitimate pressure or duress. The receivership was terminated as per the consent judgment, and there was no evidence that the respondents continued to act as re…
Source excerpt
