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
Ziruntusa v Mbabazi and 3 Others (Civil Suit 352 of 2020) [2024] UGHCCD 158 (11 October 2024)
The High Court dismissed a claim for recovery of money allegedly sent for investments, finding no proven trust or enforceable oral contract and treating the relationship as romantic.
Gatete v Rutajengwa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 505 of 2013) [2021] UGCommC 132 (29 October 2021)
The High Court of Uganda reviewed an earlier judgment, finding contradictory conclusions on property ownership and a constructive trust, and set aside the respondents' remedies.
Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd v Joseph Aine and Ors (HCT-00-CC-MA 305 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 29 (19 June 2005)
The High Court of Uganda dismissed Stanbic Bank’s application for a temporary injunction over buses allegedly linked to fraud, finding no proof of danger to the property.
D.K Construction Co. Ltd & Anor v Barclays Bank of Uganda Ltd (Civil Suit No. 644 of 2000) [2002] UGHC 42 (9 March 2002)
The High Court held that the plaintiff companies were used as conduits for fraud, pierced the corporate veil, and dismissed the suit.
D.K Construction Co. Limited & Another v Barclays Bank Uganda Limited (Civil Suit 644 of 2000) [2001] UGHC 112 (17 August 2001)
The High Court held that two plaintiff companies were used as conduits for fraud and pierced the corporate veil. The suit was dismissed and the bank kept the disputed money.
Haji Bumbakali v Wandera and 2 Others (Civil Suit 655 of 1981) [1993] UGHC 37 (24 March 1993)
The court found, based on the evidence of the vendor and corroborating witnesses, that the disputed kibanja was purchased by the late Mary Grace Nayiga and not by the plaintiff. The original sale agreement in the plaintiff's name was destroyed and replaced by a valid agreement in Nayiga's name, who provided the consideration. The developments on the land, including the house, were made by Nayiga, and any contribution by the plaintiff was negligible. The plaintiff did not have a valid marriage to Nayiga, nor did he reside in the house immediately prior to her death, and thus had no legal or au…
Source excerpt
Bumbakali v Wandera & 2 Others (Civil Suit 655 of 1981) [1993] UGHC 35 (6 January 1993)
The High Court held that the disputed kibanja belonged to the deceased Mary Grace Nayiga, not the plaintiff, and dismissed the suit.
