Uganda Case Law

Kaddu and Another v Kazibwe and 2 Others

Kaddu and Another v Kazibwe and 2 Others (Civil Suit 648 of 2020) [2025] UGHCLD 31 (6 February 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit 648 of 2020

Judge

Nkonge, J

The court found that the 1st defendant's family had occupied the suit land as their family home since 1992, with uninterrupted possession and recognition by local authorities. The evidence showed that the family was not compensated for their interest, and their occupation predated the plaintiffs' acquisition of title. The law protects lawful and bona fide occupants, including family land, and prohibits transactions without spousal consent. The plaintiffs failed to conduct adequate due diligence and did not compensate all occupants. The change in proprietorship did not extinguish the existing…

Source excerpt

• Trespass To Land
• Bonafide Occupant
• Family Land
• Title Registration
• Compensation For Land
• Due Diligence

Winaz Commercial Investiment Limited v Masindi District Local Government (Application 40 of 2024)

Winaz Commercial Investiment Limited v Masindi District Local Government (Application 40 of 2024) [2024] UGPPDPAAT 41 (1 October 2024)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 40 of 2024

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal dismissed Winaz Commercial Investment Ltd’s review application, upholding its disqualification for unmet mandatory bid requirements and allowing the procurement to continue.

• Public Procurement
• Bid Evaluation
• Conflict Of Interest
• Administrative Review
• Contract Award
• Due Diligence

Kasolo & Another v Mulumba & 2 Others

Kasolo & Another v Mulumba & 2 Others (Civil Appeal 72 of 2018) [2024] UGHC 1179 (10 September 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 72 of 2018

Judge

Oyuko Anthony Ojok, J

The High Court dismissed an appeal over a disputed land sale, finding the buyers failed to prove measurements in the agreement and had not shown due diligence.

• Sale Of Land
• Due Diligence
• Evidence Evaluation
• Fraudulent Conveyance
• Land-sale
• Due-diligence

Attorney General v Byaruhanga and 2499 Others

Attorney General v Byaruhanga and 2499 Others (Civil Application No. 239 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 231 (16 September 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application No. 239 of 2021

Judge

Egonda-Ntende, JA, Kibeedi Mutangula, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the applicant failed to satisfy the strict criteria for admission of additional evidence on appeal. The evidence was not new or unavailable at trial despite due diligence, as the applicant was aware of the need for a Government Valuer's report and was granted several adjournments to produce it but failed to do so. The intended evidence was not attached to the application, undermining its credibility and preventing the court from assessing its probative value. Furthermore, the evidence would not have materially influenced the outcome, as the core issue was the res…

Source excerpt

• Additional Evidence On Appeal
• Appellate Discretion
• Due Diligence
• Admissibility Of Evidence

Centenary Rural Development Bank Limited v Odongipou

Centenary Rural Development Bank Limited v Odongipou (Miscellaneous Application No. 285 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 27 (26 April 2022)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 285 of 2021

Judge

Abinyo, J

The High Court dismissed a bank’s review application, finding no sufficient new evidence and holding that the applicant had not shown due diligence before the earlier ruling.

• Review Of Judgment
• Mortgage Registration
• Due Diligence
• General Damages
• Review-of-judgment
• Due-diligence

Mbale United Trucks and Pick Ups Drive Association (Application No. 31 of 31)

Mbale United Trucks and Pick Ups Drive Association (Application No. 31 of 31) [2021] UGPPDPAAT 11 (16 December 2021)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application No. 31 of 31

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Gimara SC, Chairperson, Kakira, Kalumba

The Tribunal found that the Contracts Committee had already made an award of contract on 9th November 2021, and any subsequent cancellation of the procurement process was ultra vires and illegal, as section 75 of the PPDA Act only permits cancellation before an award. The Accounting Officer failed to communicate a decision on the Applicant's administrative review within the statutory 10-day period, rendering the process non-compliant and vesting the Tribunal with jurisdiction. Both the Applicant and the Best Evaluated Bidder were found not qualified for award: the Applicant due to outstanding…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Bid Evaluation
• Administrative Review
• Contract Award
• Due Diligence
• Fair Hearing

Elite Chemicals Limited v Uganda Coffee Development Authority (Application No. 8 of 2021)

Elite Chemicals Limited v Uganda Coffee Development Authority (Application No. 8 of 2021) [2021] UGPPDPAAT 5 (29 July 2021)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application No. 8 of 2021

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Gimara SC, Chairperson, Isanga, Ag. Chairperson, Kalumba

The Tribunal set aside an administrative review decision over pesticide procurement, finding the due diligence process irregular and the bidder denied a fair hearing.

• Public Procurement
• Due Diligence
• Natural Justice
• Bid Evaluation
• Contract Award
• Administrative Review

The Registered Trustees of the church of Uganda of Kitgum Doicese Vs Oryema & 18 Ors

The Registered Trustees of the church of Uganda of Kitgum Doicese Vs Oryema & 18 Ors (MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION No. 0136 OF 2018) [2018] UGHCCD 46 (11 October 2018)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION No. 0136 OF 2018

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to satisfy the legal requirements for admission of additional evidence on appeal. The court found that the evidence sought to be introduced was not shown to be newly discovered or unavailable with reasonable diligence at the time of trial. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation or proof of efforts made to retrieve the documents from more reliable sources such as the Land Registry, nor did they explain the circumstances of their discovery. The evidence was also found to be irrelevant to the issues on appeal, as it perta…

Source excerpt

• Adducing Additional Evidence
• Appellate Procedure
• Land Ownership Disputes
• Due Diligence
• Finality Of Litigation

Natty Ntare v Equity Bank(U) Ltd & Anor

Natty Ntare v Equity Bank(U) Ltd & Anor (Miscellaneous Cause No. 16 of 2015) [2015] UGCommC 200 (25 September 2015)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 16 of 2015

The court upheld the bank’s mortgage and held that the mortgagor’s misrepresentation about her marital status, not the bank, caused the lack of spousal consent.

• Mortgage Review
• Spousal Consent
• Matrimonial Property
• Due Diligence
• Statutory Declaration
• Mortgage-review

Eriasafani Mudumba v Wilberforce Kuluse

Eriasafani Mudumba v Wilberforce Kuluse (Civil Application No. 34 of 1997) [1997] UGCA 2 (1 October 1997)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application No. 34 of 1997

The court found that the applicant had exercised due diligence by lodging the notice of appeal and requesting the proceedings within the prescribed time. The inordinate delay of about three years in obtaining the proceedings was entirely attributable to the court, not the applicant. Poverty and delay by assigned counsel were not sufficient reasons, but the applicant's actions demonstrated diligence and absence of fault. Procedural defects in the affidavit did not amount to special circumstances warranting refusal of the application. In the interests of substantive justice, the court granted t…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Affidavit Requirements
• Due Diligence
• Court Delay