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
Magolo & Another v The Howe Christian Charitable Trust Limited & Others (Civil Suit 1 of 2021) [2025] UGHC 408 (10 June 2025)
The High Court held that the suit land was unlawfully transferred to the 2nd Defendant, but rejected the Plaintiffs’ ownership claims over the school and vehicles.
Chao and 2 Others v Jun and 3 Others (Civil Suit 220 of 2020) [2024] UGHCCD 125 (12 August 2024)
The High Court found a binding shareholders’ cooperation agreement, held the defendants breached it, and ordered specific performance, shareholding changes, and damages.
Promised Lands of Praise Limited & Another v Ntalo (HCT-03-CV-MA 91 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 951 (19 July 2024)
The High Court at Jinja dismissed a contempt application, finding insufficient proof that the respondent breached a consent order on tree cutting.
Musumba & Another v Nile Agro Industries (Miscellaneous Application 251 of 2019) [2024] UGHC 622 (3 July 2024)
The High Court upheld preliminary objections, finding the 1st Applicant lacked locus standi and the company application was improperly constituted.
Kirima Limited & 4 Others v Kabushenga (Civil Suit 18 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 200 (6 May 2024)
The court found that PW1 and PW2 were validly appointed directors of the 4th and 5th Plaintiffs at the time the suit was filed, as evidenced by resolutions and filings with URSB. No valid resolution or special notice removing them as directors was produced, nor was there evidence of compliance with section 195 of the Companies Act. The notifications of removal and appointment of new directors were either filed after the suit or not preceded by proper resolutions. The law does not require a written resolution to commence a suit; agreement by directors is sufficient. Therefore, MMAKS Advocates…
Source excerpt
Kirima & 4 Others v Kabushenga (Civil Suit 18 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 295 (6 May 2024)
The High Court held that MMAKS Advocates was duly instructed to act for the 4th and 5th plaintiffs, and dismissed the preliminary objection.
Bujingo & 2 Others v Wanjala & 2 Others (Company Complaint 12515 of 2022) [2023] UGRSB 2 (6 September 2023)
The Registrar found no proof of who filed the alleged forged company documents, but held that new directors were unlawfully appointed and expunged related filings.
Muluba Farm Limited v Mugisha Nyarikindi (Civil Appeal 50 of 2010) [2018] UGCA 240 (14 August 2018)
The Court of Appeal set aside the dismissal of a land suit, holding that disputed facts could not be resolved on preliminary objections or unsupported documents.
SOT Enterprises Limited v Rukeribuga (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.157 OF 2016) [2016] UGHCCD 140 (24 November 2016)
The court held that while procedural timelines for filing affidavits are directory and not strictly mandatory, and thus the respondent's late affidavit could be validated, the application itself was fatally defective because the supporting affidavit was sworn by Prof. G. W. Kanyeihamba, who was not shown to be a director or shareholder of the applicant company. The respondent provided incorporation documents showing Prof. Kanyeihamba was not a member or director, and the applicant failed to rebut this evidence or provide proof of his authority. As a result, the affidavit was incurably defecti…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Namuyimba & Anor (CR.Sc No. 102 of 2011) [2012] UGHC 124 (6 July 2012)
High Court of Uganda convicted Shanita Namuyimbwa of embezzlement and both accused of conspiracy to defraud over withdrawals from Daveshan Developments' account.
