Uganda
Sign in
Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Commercial And Corporate [2020] UGCA 2050

Crane Bank [In Receivership] v Ruparelia & Another

Crane Bank [In Receivership] v Ruparelia & Another (Civil Appeal No. 252 of 2019) [2020] UGCA 2050 (23 June 2020)

The Court of Appeal held that Crane Bank Limited (in Receivership) lacked legal capacity to institute proceedings in its own name during receivership, as the Financial Institutions Act does not confer such power on a receiver. The Act expressly grants the power to sue to statutory managers and liquidators, but not to receivers. The statutory time span for receivership is limited to twelve months, after which the receiver's powers cease. The appellant, being majority-owned by non-citizens, is classified as a non-citizen under the Land Act and is prohibited from owning freehold or mailo land in…

  • Receivership Powers
  • Corporate Capacity To Sue
  • Preliminary Objections
  • Locus Standi
  • Ownership Of Land By Non Citizens
  • Award Of Costs
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2020] UGCA 2173

Crane Bank Limited [In Receivership] v Sudhir Ruparelia and Meera Investments Limited

Crane Bank Limited [In Receivership] v Sudhir Ruparelia and Meera Investments Limited (Civil Appeal No. 252 of 2019) [2020] UGCA 2173 (23 June 2020)

The Court of Appeal held that Crane Bank Limited, while under receivership, lacked legal capacity to institute proceedings because the Financial Institutions Act does not confer the power to sue on a receiver, unlike the statutory manager or liquidator. The statutory time span for receivership is limited to twelve months, after which receivership ceases by operation of law. The appellant, being majority-owned by non-citizens, is classified as a non-citizen under the Land Act and is prohibited from owning freehold or mailo land in Uganda. The preliminary objections raised by the respondents we…

  • Receivership Powers
  • Corporate Capacity To Sue
  • Preliminary Objections
  • Locus Standi
  • Ownership Of Land By Non Citizens
  • Costs Award
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2012] UGCommC 71

Kilembe Mines Ltd v Uganda Gold Mines Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 312 of 2012)

Kilembe Mines Ltd v Uganda Gold Mines Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 312 of 2012) [2012] UGCommC 71 (27 June 2012)

The court found that Uganda Gold Mines Limited, as described in the plaint, does not exist as a legal entity incorporated in Uganda. The error in naming the Plaintiff was not a mere misnomer but a substantive defect, as the entity purported to sue did not exist in law. The authorities cited establish that a non-existent person or entity cannot maintain an action, and such a defect cannot be cured by amendment. Consequently, the suit was a nullity, disclosed no cause of action, and was struck out. The court also held that no order as to costs could be made against a non-existent Plaintiff.

  • Striking Out Plaint
  • Legal Existence Of Company
  • Misnomer In Pleadings
  • Cause Of Action
  • Corporate Capacity To Sue
Read case analysis

About this JurisAssist collection

Uganda decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.