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
Safari Clothing (Uganda) Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal 12 of 2021) [2024] UGCommC 11 (30 January 2024)
The High Court dismissed a tax appeal because the notice of appeal failed to state questions of law, as required for appeals from the Tax Appeals Tribunal.
Eastlands Agency Limited v Makwasi Bertha Barozi (Civil Appeal 17 of 2018) [2023] UGHCCD 379 (22 September 2023)
The High Court dismissed an appeal over rent arrears, holding that an agent managing property must act diligently and may be liable for direct loss caused by neglect.
Mwebaze Vs Mutuye (HCT – 01 – CV – LD – CA – 044 OF 2015) [2018] UGHCCD 77 (19 December 2018)
The High Court found that the Appellant’s father lawfully purchased the suit land in 2002 from Evans Maniragaba and John Batalingaya, supported by a valid sale agreement and corroborated by credible witnesses. The Respondent’s claims of allocation by Kamwenge Town Council or Uganda Railways Corporation were inconsistent, unsubstantiated, and contradicted by documentary evidence, including a letter from Uganda Railways Corporation disclaiming ownership of the land. The trial Magistrate erred in evaluating the evidence, misapplied the law regarding equitable interests, and wrongly declared the…
Source excerpt
Mukhama Vs Namatiti (HCT-04-CV-CA-0007-2001) [2009] UGHCCD 3 (10 March 2009)
The High Court dismissed an appeal on costs, holding that the appellant’s prior illegal conduct justified each party bearing its own costs below.
Wokomoli v Wanda & 2 Ors (HCT-04-CV-CA-0059-2008) [2010] UGHC 30 (11 March 2010)
The trial magistrate failed to award costs to the appellant and did not provide any reasons for this omission. The established legal principle is that costs follow the event unless the court provides reasons for not awarding them. In the absence of such reasons, it was unfair to deny the appellant costs. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to taxed costs in the lower court. However, since the respondents were not responsible for the magistrate's omission, each party will bear its own costs in the appeal.
Source excerpt
