Darshan-Pal Singh Panesar & Others v Jasper Singh Puaar & Signum Advocates (Miscellaneous Application 1211 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 46 (10 July 2025)
Court
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Case number
Miscellaneous Application 1211 of 2025
Judge
Keitirima, J
The Court found that the applicants, as beneficiaries under the Will, are entitled to the proceeds of the sale of Namirembe property and to the transfer of the Kololo property. The executor failed to fulfill his statutory obligations to render an inventory and final account within the required time, justifying the applicants' mistrust. The law firm was justified in retaining the proceeds pending resolution of the dispute. The executor's claim that UK tax obligations justified withholding the Ugandan estate proceeds was rejected, as the Will and sale agreement did not link Ugandan properties t…
Namugwanya Immaculate and Others v Kyazze Ronald and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 2260 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 29 (16 June 2025)
Court
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Case number
Miscellaneous Application No. 2260 of 2025
Judge
Nagawa, J
The High Court granted an extension of letters of administration for the Nganda estate, subject to the administrators filing an account within three weeks.
Mukasa David and Others v Kakembo Ntambi Beatrice and Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause 21 of 2025) [2025] UGHCLD 72 (30 May 2025)
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Case number
Miscellaneous Cause 21 of 2025
Judge
Naluzze Aisha Batala, J
The High Court dismissed an application to remove a caveat over estate land, holding the dispute involved contested beneficiary rights best resolved in a substantive suit.
Kakembo & 4 Others v Nakato (Civil Suit 305 of 2022) [2025] UGHCFD 21 (30 May 2025)
Court
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Case number
Civil Suit 305 of 2022
Judge
Echookit, J
The court found that the Defendant failed to prove a valid gift inter vivos of the suit land from the late Agiri Nakanyoro, as no deed or registered transfer was produced and the evidence was largely hearsay. The Plaintiffs did not prove fraud in the Defendant's acquisition of letters of administration, as the evidence regarding the alleged forged certificate of no objection was inconclusive and not substantiated to the required standard. The Defendant's registration of the land in her personal name, rather than as administrator, was improper and must be rectified. The Plaintiffs failed to es…
Mpalanyi Henry and Another v Kakumba Bernard Tamale and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 0581 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 410 (30 May 2025)
Court
High Court of Uganda
Case number
Miscellaneous Application No. 0581 of 2024
Judge
Stephen Mubiru, J
The High Court at Mukono set aside a consent judgment after finding the applicants, as beneficiaries, had standing and that estate funds were being channelled through personal accounts.
Wamulima v Wamale (Civil Suit 3 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 269 (12 May 2025)
Court
High Court of Uganda
Case number
Civil Suit 3 of 2022
Judge
Lubega, J
The High Court dismissed a challenge to letters of administration, finding no proven fraud, no deliberate concealment, and no basis for damages or revocation.
Waliggo v Kiwankuka and Njongo (Miscellaneous Application 125 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 212 (21 April 2025)
Court
High Court of Uganda
Case number
Miscellaneous Application 125 of 2023
Judge
Tweyanze, J
The High Court at Masaka dismissed an application to set aside a consent judgment, holding that the applicant lacked locus standi to challenge the estate transaction.
Bugingo and Others v Sserunkuma and Others (Civil Suit 102 of 2022) [2025] UGHCFD 14 (14 April 2025)
Court
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Case number
Civil Suit 102 of 2022
Judge
Komuhangi, J
The High Court held that the disputed Bulwa property belonged to Philomena Arombo Obol’s estate, invalidated later dealings, and cancelled the lease to the 3rd defendant.
Dr. Joseph Tindyebwa v Amiina Christine (Miscellaneous Cause 5 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 350 (10 April 2025)
Court
High Court of Uganda
Case number
Miscellaneous Cause 5 of 2023
Judge
Emokor, J
The High Court held that the respondent beneficiary had a caveatable interest in estate land and refused to lift the caveat. The application was dismissed with costs.