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
Bwambale Ezironi v Kyamukube Town Council Local Government and 4 Others (HCT-01-CV-MA 16 of 2021) [2024] UGHC 744 (16 August 2024)
The High Court struck out a judicial review application as overtaken by events after the applicant’s office instruments were returned, leaving no live dispute.
Mbaguta v Kasaija (Miscellaneous Application 40 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 194 (28 April 2023)
The court found that the intended amendment does not introduce a new cause of action but seeks to enhance the applicant's claim based on facts discovered after the initial filing. The amendment is necessary to determine the real questions in controversy and does not prejudice the respondent, as any inconvenience can be compensated by costs. The court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment, emphasizing that substantive justice should prevail over procedural technicalities. The applicant is granted leave to amend the plaint within seven days, and the respondent may respond within seven…
Source excerpt
Prince Kateregga v Kiyimba ((land Division) Hccs No.482 of 2011) [2017] UGHCLD 89 (20 September 2017)
The High Court Land Division dismissed a claim over Kibanja land in Bunamwaya, finding the plaintiffs failed to prove lawful or bona fide occupation or that the defendant demolished their property.
Sebabi & Ors v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Suit No 62 of 2006) [2013] UGHCCD 63 (30 April 2013)
The plaintiffs were employed on permanent and pensionable terms under the old Human Resources Management Manual, which entitled them to a long service award at 2.5% of gross annual pay upon termination or retirement. The new Human Resources Management Manual, effective 1st August 2004, provided for a 15% gratuity only for employees appointed on contract under its provisions. No evidence was adduced that any plaintiff was appointed on contract under the new manual; thus, their claim for gratuity at 15% is unsustainable. The retrenchment package paid to the plaintiffs included payment in lieu o…
Source excerpt
