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
Lake Oil Uganda Limited v Don (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application 685 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 51 (4 March 2025)
The High Court refused judgment on admission, holding that the respondent admitted supply and contract but disputed the sum claimed.
Omaya v Elijo and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 44 of 2021) [2023] UGHCCD 80 (31 March 2023)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal, holding that no question of law was shown and the request was an abuse of process.
Kateyo v Makerere University (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 147 of 2021) [2022] UGIC 75 (14 January 2022)
The Industrial Court of Uganda dismissed an application to review its earlier ruling on interest, finding the late filing of submissions was not sufficiently excused.
Matovu v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2021) [2021] UGHCCRD 34 (16 August 2021)
The High Court determined that the appeal was improperly before it because it arose from an interlocutory and discretionary order of the trial magistrate, not a final decision. The law, as clarified in Charles Harry Twagira and Section 216 of the Magistrates Act, does not confer a right of appeal to the High Court in respect of such orders in criminal matters. Any challenge to discretionary orders must be made by way of revision, not appeal. As the trial magistrate had not made a final decision and no witness had testified, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit and jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
Noble Builders (U) Limited and Anor v Jabal Singh Sandhu (Civil Application 15 of 2002) [2004] UGSC 12 (3 March 2004)
The court held that the applicants had shown sufficient cause for requiring further security for costs. The respondent is a foreigner resident in Canada with no assets in Uganda, and the risk of non-recovery of costs is real. The respondent did not provide evidence that Ugandan judgments are readily enforceable in Canada, nor that reciprocal enforcement provisions apply. The court distinguished English authorities cited by the respondent, noting that the circumstances and statutory frameworks differ. The rationale for security for costs is to protect a successful party from real difficulty in…
Source excerpt
The Jubilee Insurance Co. (U) Ltd v Krediet Geneve Inc (MISC. APPLICATION NO.338 OF 2001. ) (MISC.Application No. 338 of 2001) [2002] UGHC 30 (15 December 2002)
The High Court ordered a foreign respondent with no known Ugandan assets to provide security for costs, fixing security at UGX 4,000,000 by bond.
