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: 18 Sep 2026, 02:51 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

13 Mar 2024

Civil Procedure [2024] UGCommC 87

Medipharm Sales Limited v Mirza

Medipharm Sales Limited v Mirza (Miscellaneous Application 780 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 87 (13 March 2024)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Miscellaneous Application 780 of 2023
Judge: Mutesi, J

The application for review was found competent because the completion of execution does not preclude the court from addressing potential injustices or errors in the execution process. However, upon examination of the record, the court found no error apparent on the face of the record regarding the apportionment of costs. The law provides that, unless otherwise specified, parties against whom costs are awarded are jointly and severally liable, allowing the judgment creditor to recover the full amount from any one debtor. The alleged unfairness in execution against the applicant alone does not…

Source excerpt

Review Of Execution
Costs Apportionment
Garnishee Orders
Joint And Several Liability

Read case analysis

1 Jan 1934

Commercial And Corporate [1934] EACA 1

Belge S.A. v Sibilia (C.A. 21/1934)

Belge S.A. v Sibilia (C.A. 21/1934) [1934] EACA 1 (1 January 1934)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: C.A. 21/1934
Judge: Bates, J. (Tanganyika), Law, C.J (Zanzibar), Lucie-Smith Ag CJ (Kenya)

The Court held that the respondent was entitled under Rule 30 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1925, to contest the entire judgment and not merely the portion appealed by the appellants. Evidence admitted outside the pleadings was properly adjudicated upon as both parties addressed arguments on it and did not object. The trial judge correctly applied Field v. Carr in finding that the appellants, having appropriated notes A and D to the credit of Jivanjee Bros., could not recover their value from the respondent. Exhibit 11 was construed to provide for the promissory notes as continuing security f…