Uganda Case Law

Legal Brains Trust (LBT) Limited v Basajjabalaba & 14 Others

Legal Brains Trust (LBT) Limited v Basajjabalaba & 14 Others (Constitutional Application 3 of 2024) [2024] UGSC 35 (11 July 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Constitutional Application 3 of 2024

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC, Madrama , JSC, Catherine Bamugemereire, JSC, Monica K. Mugenyi, JSC

The Supreme Court partly allowed a constitutional application: it refused substitution of the late Prof. Mutebile’s estate, allowed the bank name change, and denied leave to amend the cross-appeal.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Party Substitution
• Company Name Change
• Vicarious Liability
• Appeal Procedure
• Amendment-of-pleadings

CTM Uganda Limited & 2 Others v Alimuss Properties Uganda Limited & 3 Others

CTM Uganda Limited & 2 Others v Alimuss Properties Uganda Limited & 3 Others [2024] UGSC 6 (29 January 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Judge

Mwondha, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC, Elizabeth Musoke, JSC, Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, JSC

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal challenging a consent judgment and company name change, holding that the consent remained valid despite flaws in the name-change process.

• Company Name Change
• Consent Judgment
• Shareholder Resolution
• Director Authority
• Indoor Management Rule
• Statutory Compliance

Protea Chemicals Eastr Africa Limited v KAC Chemicals and Paints (U) Limited

Protea Chemicals Eastr Africa Limited v KAC Chemicals and Paints (U) Limited (Civil Suit No. 470 of 2016) [2021] UGCommC 113 (27 September 2021)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit No. 470 of 2016

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court held that the defendant owed the plaintiff US$63,412 for unpaid chemical supplies, and awarded interest at 6% per annum plus costs.

• Contract Enforcement
• Company Name Change
• Sale Of Goods
• Burden Of Proof
• Interest Awards
• Contract-enforcement

Protea Chemicals East Africa Limited v KAC Chemicals And Paints (U) Limited

Protea Chemicals East Africa Limited v KAC Chemicals And Paints (U) Limited (Civil Suit 470 of 2016) [2021] UGCommC 185 (27 September 2021)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 470 of 2016

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court held that the defendant owed the plaintiff US$63,412 for chemical supplies, and awarded 6% interest from 15 February 2014 plus costs.

• Contract Enforcement
• Sale Of Goods
• Company Name Change
• Burden Of Proof
• Interest Awards
• Contract-enforcement

Attorney General v East Africa Gold Sniffing Company Ltd

Attorney General v East Africa Gold Sniffing Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2013) [2020] UGCA 2049 (12 June 2020)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2013

Judge

Kakuru, JA, Madrama, JA, Kiryabwire, JA

The Court of Appeal dismissed the Attorney General’s appeal, upholding the High Court’s view that the company lacked standing to seek administrative review under the Mining Act.

• Judicial Review
• Locus Standi
• Ministerial Jurisdiction
• Ultra Vires
• Company Name Change
• Judicial-review

Kanyeihamba v Nzeyi & 3 Ors (HCT-00-CC-CS 361 of 2010)

Kanyeihamba v Nzeyi & 3 Ors (HCT-00-CC-CS 361 of 2010) [2014] UGCommC 139 (10 September 2014)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-00-CC-CS 361 of 2010

The High Court dismissed a shareholder suit challenging the conversion of Kigezi Bank of Commerce into National Bank of Commerce.

• Company Name Change
• Memorandum And Articles Amendment
• Shareholder Rights
• Corporate Meetings
• Fraud Allegations
• Corporate Liability

Habre International Uganda Limited v Dabo Kalilou

Habre International Uganda Limited v Dabo Kalilou (Civil Suit No. 739 of 2006) [2011] UGHCLD 2 (17 March 2011)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit No. 739 of 2006

Judge

Aweri-Opio, J

The court found that the defendant purchased the suit land from the plaintiff company through its director, Hussein Abdalla, who had ostensible authority to transact on behalf of the company. The change of company name did not affect the company's legal identity or its ability to transfer property. The transaction was not tainted with fraud, as the defendant acted in good faith and relied on the representations and actions of the company's authorised director. Any under-declaration of the purchase price was attributed to the lawyers, not the defendant, and there was no evidence of fraudulent…

Source excerpt

• Company Name Change
• Ostensible Authority
• Fraud In Land Transfer
• Mortgage Redemption
• Ministerial Consent
• Demolition Of Structures