Uganda Case Law

Mwesigye Isha Evans and Another v Tebagalika Kasirye G.W. and Others

Mwesigye Isha Evans and Another v Tebagalika Kasirye G.W. and Others (Civil Suit No. 875 of 2019) [2025] UGCommC 212 (9 July 2025)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit No. 875 of 2019

Judge

Susan Odongo, J

The court found that although a sale agreement existed between the plaintiffs and the defendants, the defendants, acting as administrators, lacked legal capacity and authority to sell the land, as they were not the registered proprietors and did not have beneficiary consent. This rendered the contract void ab initio. The defendants' conduct amounted to fraud and misrepresentation by concealing their lack of authority and misrepresenting their ability to sell the land. However, the plaintiffs failed to exercise ordinary diligence by not verifying the title or contacting the registered propriet…

Source excerpt

• Sale Of Land Contract
• Capacity To Contract
• Fraud And Misrepresentation
• Constructive Notice
• Remedies For Breach
• Administration Of Estates

Ndyamuhaaki v Ninsiima and Another (HCT-01-LD-CA-0058-2017)

Ndyamuhaaki v Ninsiima and Another (HCT-01-LD-CA-0058-2017) [2025] UGHC 442 (11 June 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-01-LD-CA-0058-2017

Judge

Wagona, J

The High Court dismissed an appeal over competing land sale agreements, finding the appellant lacked capacity to contract and had not pleaded fraud.

• Capacity To Contract
• Land Ownership Disputes
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Fraud In Contracts
• Land-ownership-disputes
• Capacity-to-contract

Sickle Strong Ltd v Agnes Kimbugwe and Damba Alfred Sofasi

Sickle Strong Ltd v Agnes Kimbugwe and Damba Alfred Sofasi (Miscellaneous Application 123 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 375 (28 May 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 123 of 2025

Judge

Godfrey Himbaza, J

The High Court refused to stay execution of a land judgment, holding that the applicant failed to show a legally recognizable lease interest or a strong case for setting aside the judgment.

• Stay Of Execution
• Leasehold Interest
• Capacity To Contract
• Registration Of Title
• Ex Parte Judgment
• Stay-of-execution

Kasoma v Mukiibi

Kasoma v Mukiibi (Civil Appeal 24 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 80 (26 February 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 24 of 2023

Judge

Rosette Comfort Kania, J

The High Court allowed a land sale appeal, holding the trial court wrongly raised inheritance-capacity issues not pleaded and ordered specific performance.

• Sale Of Land
• Capacity To Contract
• Letters Of Administration
• Specific Performance
• Bonafide Purchaser
• Remedies For Breach

Kibirango v Nabatanzi & 2 Others

Kibirango v Nabatanzi & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause 144 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 16 (21 January 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause 144 of 2024

Judge

Naluzze Aisha Batala, J

The High Court dismissed an application for consequential orders seeking transfer of land from an estate, holding the request was not traceable to the earlier judgment.

• Consequential Orders
• Estate Administration
• Fraudulent Transfer
• Capacity To Contract
• Beneficiary Rights
• Consequential-orders

Kama v Mayanja aka Pallaso

Kama v Mayanja aka Pallaso (Civil Suit 725 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 327 (6 September 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 725 of 2022

Judge

Kahigi Asiimwe, J

The High Court held that an artist management contract was void because the plaintiff’s business was not registered and lacked capacity to contract.

• Capacity To Contract
• Business Names Registration
• Enforceability Of Contracts
• Company Law
• Abuse Of Process
• Capacity-to-contract

Dynamic Consortium Limited v Uganda Nurse, NSG & Another

Dynamic Consortium Limited v Uganda Nurse, NSG & Another (Civil Suit 32 of 2017) [2024] UGHC 574 (1 July 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 32 of 2017

Judge

Acellam, J

The High Court at Arua dismissed a contract claim against an alleged non-existent defendant, finding no proven legal entity, no valid contract, and no cause of action.

• Cause Of Action
• Capacity To Contract
• Existence Of Legal Entity
• Contract Enforceability
• Public Procurement
• Abuse Of Court Process

Busingye & Another v Matovu

Busingye & Another v Matovu (Miscellaneous Cause 50 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 115 (19 April 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause 50 of 2023

Judge

Ocaya, J

The court found that the applicants were instructed by Geresome Tabula Matovu to perform legal services, but the documents evidencing the instructions did not comply with the Illiterates Protection Act, rendering them void. However, the court held that where a benefit was derived, compensation is still due under Section 54(1) of the Contracts Act. The court was not satisfied that GTM was permanently incapable of contracting at the material time, as evidence suggested lucid intervals and the respondents themselves relied on documents executed by GTM after his diagnosis. The absence of a writte…

Source excerpt

• Advocate Client Costs
• Taxation Of Costs
• Capacity To Contract
• Illiterates Protection
• Personal Representatives Liability

Kamba Yunus v Ifuke Fred

Kamba Yunus v Ifuke Fred (Civil Suit 83 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 24 (11 January 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 83 of 2022

Judge

Batema, J

The High Court dismissed an appeal over disputed land, finding the land had been gifted inter vivos to Robert Mugaya and validly sold to the respondent.

• Gift Intervivos
• Capacity To Contract
• Letters Of Administration
• Trespass To Land
• Land-and-property
• Gift-inter-vivos

Kanzira v Natukunda Rwanchwende and Another

Kanzira v Natukunda Rwanchwende and Another (Civil Appeal 81 of 2020) [2023] UGCA 286 (2 November 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 81 of 2020

Judge

Bamugemereire, JA, Kibeedi Mutangula, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal found that while the 1st respondent held legal title as administrator, the 2nd respondent, as a beneficiary, had a defined and exclusive beneficial interest in a portion of the estate land, which he was entitled to sell. The court held that the 2nd respondent was not proven to be of unsound mind at the time of the transaction, and thus had capacity to contract. The 1st respondent, by his conduct and acquiescence, was estopped from denying the validity of the sale. The appellant acted in good faith and exercised reasonable diligence, relying on the apparent consent and esta…

Source excerpt

• Succession Of Estates
• Beneficial Interest
• Specific Performance
• Capacity To Contract
• Trusteeship
• Land Sale Disputes