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
Jogoo v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 014/2018) [2025] AfCHPR 20 (26 June 2025)
The African Court held that the application was inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust local remedies in Tanzania, despite the Court finding it had jurisdiction.
Nasaka v Attorney General & Anor (Misc. Cause No. 0179 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 40 (27 June 2016)
The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging a minister’s refusal of an entry permit and deportation order, holding the applicant’s profession was not covered by the protocol.
Cecil David Edward Hugh vs Attorney General (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 266 OF 2013) [2015] UGHCCD 179 (12 May 2015)
The court found that the Minister of Internal Affairs, in issuing the deportation order against the Applicant, failed to accord him a hearing at any stage, thereby violating Articles 28, 42, and 44(c) of the Constitution and the rules of natural justice. The Minister's actions were illegal, procedurally improper, and irrational, as there was no reasonable basis for the abrupt separation of the Applicant from his family, nor any evidence of fair treatment or opportunity to appeal. The deportation order was therefore quashed as it was embedded in illegality, irrationality, and procedural improp…
Source excerpt
Yakubu Bukenya v Uganda (CR.Appeal No. 8 of 2009) [2010] UGHC 53 (17 June 2010)
The High Court allowed an appeal against a conviction for unlawful return of a deported person, quashed the sentence, and acquitted Yakubu Bukenya.
Legal Defence Centre v Gambia (Communication 219 of 1998) [2000] ACHPR 18 (11 May 2000)
The African Commission found the complaint inadmissible because the NGO failed to show that available local remedies in Gambia had been exhausted.
Shah v Attorney General for Kenya and Another (Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1955) [1955] EACA 291 (1 January 1955)
The Court held that the appellant lawfully entered Kenya under the Defence (Admission of Women and Children) Regulations, 1940, read with the Immigration Restriction Ordinance (Cap. 62), as there was no statutory requirement for a written entry permit in cases of unconditional permission. The Court found that any misrepresentation in the passport application was innocent and did not amount to fraud; thus, the permission to enter remained valid until expressly revoked. Since no revocation occurred before the appellant completed five years of lawful residence, he attained permanent resident sta…
Source excerpt
Bhagubhai Bhanabhai [1954] EACA 134 (1 January 1954)
The court held that the word 'child' in item (c) of the Schedule to the Defence (Admission of Women and Children) Regulations, 1940, refers only to legitimate issue of the first generation and does not include adopted children. However, the regulation does not require that only those who strictly fall within the scheduled categories may be admitted; rather, if the immigration officer is satisfied that a person comes within a category and is not a prohibited immigrant, he may permit entry. In this case, the immigration officer was satisfied and granted the applicant entry in 1947, and there wa…
Source excerpt
Abdou v Attorney General and Others (Civil Case No. 10 of 1951) [1951] EACA 345 (1 January 1951)
The Court held that the plaintiff's averments regarding his status as a political refugee and the applicability of the Ethiopian Agreement were irrelevant to the validity of the deportation order. The deportation was effected under the Immigration (Control) Ordinance, not under the Ethiopian Agreement, and the order was valid on its face. The Court cannot go behind a valid deportation order to inquire into motives unless it is shown to be a sham or made in abuse of power, which was not alleged or proven. The plaintiff's claims regarding wrongful handover and the jurisdiction of the Court to c…
Source excerpt
In the matter of Patel and In the matter of an application for the issue of directions in the nature of habeas corpus, Section 387 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 17 of 1948) [1948] EACA 91 (1 January 1948)
The court held that the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proving, with perfect clearness, that he had acquired a Kenya domicile of choice by the relevant date. The applicant's declarations of intention to settle permanently in Kenya were not supported by sufficient acts or circumstances demonstrating abandonment of his Indian domicile. The court emphasized that animus manendi must be accompanied by clear acts, and mere residence or ex post facto declarations are insufficient. The applicant's continued residence with relatives, lack of independent establishment, and the circumstance…
Source excerpt
Rex v Naj-Muddin (Criminal Appeal No. 94 of 1947) [1947] EACA 36 (1 January 1947)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that the charge was time-barred under section 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and that an automatic deportation order was not part of the sentence.
