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
Kanyesigye & Another v Uganda National Students Association & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause 274 of 2023) [2024] UGHCCD 78 (11 January 2024)
The High Court dismissed a judicial review application by UNSA officials for failure to exhaust internal remedies under the association’s constitution.
Katabarwa v Electricity Regulatory Authority (Miscellaneous Cause No. 327 of 2021) [2022] UGHCCD 225 (31 October 2022)
The High Court held that the employment dispute with the Electricity Regulatory Authority was a private law matter, not suitable for judicial review, and dismissed the application.
Dr. Munyambonera v Attorney General (Misc Cause No. 392 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCD 124 (22 August 2022)
The court determined that the dispute between the applicant and respondent arose from an employment contract and involved the enforcement of private law rights, not public law issues. Although the Economic Policy Research Centre is a public body, the employment relationship did not raise any statutory or constitutional public law matters. Judicial review is not available for enforcing private contractual rights, and the proper forum for such disputes is the Labour Officer or Industrial Court. The applicant's attempt to use judicial review to challenge the acceptance of his resignation and rel…
Source excerpt
A.G. of Uganda v Media Legal Defence Initiative and Ors. (Appeal 3 of 2016) [2017] EACJ 64 (26 May 2017) (Appellate Division)
The Appellate Division found that the Trial Court erred in law and procedure by failing to determine the preliminary objection regarding the competence of the affidavit supporting the application. The law requires that a preliminary objection, once raised, must be disposed of before the merits of the case are considered. The Trial Court's omission constituted an incurable procedural irregularity, vitiating its ruling. As both parties were heard on the objection, the proper course is to remit the matter to the Trial Court for a fresh ruling on the preliminary objection before any consideration…
Source excerpt
Mukasa v Nansikombi & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No 196 of 2015) [2016] UGHCFD 20 (8 July 2016)
The court found that the power of attorney granted to Cyprian Sebunjo did not expressly authorize him to file a court case on behalf of Cissy Mukasa. The authority conferred was limited to actions related to custody, negotiation, sale, and transfer of the land, but not litigation. Furthermore, the power of attorney did not comply with section 148 of the Registration of Titles Act, as it lacked the required certificate of attesting witness beneath the donor's mark. As a result, the application was found to be incompetent and could not be maintained in law. The court dismissed the application w…
Source excerpt
Munobwa v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (Misc. Application No. 221 of 2011) [2014] UGHCCD 80 (12 June 2014)
The High Court struck out an application for stay of execution, holding it was incompetent because no valid appeal was pending and leave to appeal had not been obtained.
Mbabazi and Kinkiizi Bus Service Ltd v Matco Stores Ltd and Another (Civil Application No. 75 of 2000) [2001] UGCA 51 (13 September 2001)
The application was dismissed as incompetent because the appeal had already been withdrawn by consent and struck out of the list of pending appeals by operation of law under Rule 93(3) of the Court of Appeal Rules. There was no appeal left to be restored or reinstated. Furthermore, the applicants failed to cite the relevant law or rule under which the application was brought, which is a necessary procedural requirement to guide both the court and the parties. The court declined to speculate or assume jurisdiction in the absence of a cited legal basis, upholding the respondents' preliminary ob…
Source excerpt
Uganda Corporation Creamaries Limited and Another v Reamaton Limited (Civil Application 71 of 1999) [2000] UGCA 37 (26 April 2000)
The Court of Appeal struck out a stay application because the underlying appeal had been rendered a nullity after the extension-of-time order was set aside.
