Uganda Case Law

Afedra Juliano v Uganda

Afedra Juliano v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 165 of 2018) [2025] UGCA 99 (10 April 2025)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 165 of 2018

Judge

Kiryabwire, JA, Mulyagonja, JA, Luswata, JA

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant's reliance on self-defence and defence of property was not justified by the evidence. The deceased was unarmed, posed no immediate threat, and was shot at close range while lying down, which exceeded reasonable force. The appellant's actions, including planting items on the deceased, demonstrated malice aforethought. The trial judge properly evaluated the evidence and correctly convicted the appellant of murder. However, the appellate court found that the sentence of life imprisonment was harsh and manifestly excessive, given the appellant's youthf…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Self Defence
• Defence Of Property
• Sentencing Principles
• Malice Aforethought

Uganda v No. 68816 PPC Elwelu

Uganda v No. 68816 PPC Elwelu (Criminal Session Case 132 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 118 (31 January 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Session Case 132 of 2023

Judge

Byaruhanga Rugyema, J

The High Court acquitted the accused of murder, finding he acted in self-defence and defence of property during a violent crowd incident and lacked malice aforethought.

• Murder
• Self Defence
• Malice Aforethought
• Burden Of Proof
• Defence Of Property
• Self-defence

Uganda v Kimuda & Ors

Uganda v Kimuda & Ors (Criminal Session Case No. 1201/96) [1996] UGHCCRD 3 (8 November 1996)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Session Case No. 1201/96

Judge

Engwau, J

A1 was convicted of manslaughter after the court accepted he acted under provocation, self-defence, and defence of property; A2 and A3 were acquitted.

• Murder
• Manslaughter
• Defences Self Defence
• Defences Provocation
• Defence Of Property
• Burden Of Proof

Lesso v Regina

Lesso v Regina (Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 1952) [1952] EACA 249 (1 January 1952)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 1952

Judges

Nihill P, Worley VP

The Court held that the doctrine of provocation under sections 201 and 202 of the Penal Code does not extend to wrongful acts done solely to property. The appellant, having pursued and killed the deceased after the attempted burglary had ceased, could not rely on provocation or defence of property to mitigate the offence. The right to use force in effecting an arrest or defending property is limited to what is reasonable and necessary in the circumstances. The trial judge's finding that the appellant's dominant intention was to kill in retaliation, rather than to effect an arrest, was support…

Source excerpt

• Homicide
• Provocation
• Defence Of Property
• Arrest By Private Person
• Use Of Force
• Manslaughter Vs Murder

Damulira v Reginam

Damulira v Reginam (Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 1956) [1950] EACA 501 (1 January 1950)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 1956

Judge

Bacon, JA, Sinclair, VP, Worley, P

The East African Court of Appeal reduced a murder conviction to manslaughter after finding doubt on malice aforethought and excess force in defence of property.

• Homicide
• Defence Of Property
• Malice Aforethought
• Use Of Force
• Manslaughter
• Murder