Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 1 court collection
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 03:53 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

3 Jul 1998

Land And Property [1998] UGCA 46

Jaffer Brothers Limited v Bagaliwo and 2 Others

Jaffer Brothers Limited v Bagaliwo and 2 Others (Civil Suit 43 of 1997) [1998] UGCA 46 (3 July 1998)

Court: Court of Appeal of Uganda
Case number: Civil Suit 43 of 1997
Judge: Okello, JA, Berko, JA, Engwau, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant's suit was not time barred because the relevant limitation period began to run only from the date the Minister issued the letter of repossession (7/12/93), not from the date the first respondent acquired the property. The Court found that the letter of repossession, clarified by a subsequent letter, was sufficient to vest equitable rights in the appellant under the Expropriated Properties Act, 1982, and that strict compliance with the prescribed form was not required where the substance of the Act was fulfilled. The consent judgment between the firs…

Source excerpt

Expropriated Properties
Repossession Procedure
Limitation Periods
Locus Standi
Effect Of Consent Judgment

Read case analysis

3 Jul 1998

Land And Property [1998] UGCA 18

Jaffer Brothers Ltd vs Mohamed Magid Bagalaliwo and 2 Others

Jaffer Brothers Ltd vs Mohamed Magid Bagalaliwo and 2 Others (Civil Appeal No 43 of 1997) [1998] UGCA 18 (3 July 1998)

Court: Court of Appeal of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal No 43 of 1997

The Court of Appeal held that the Expropriated Properties Act, 1982 is a remedial statute and must be interpreted liberally to achieve its purpose of returning expropriated properties to former owners. The procedural requirement to apply for repossession within ninety days is directory, not mandatory, and the Minister's letter authorizing repossession, though not in prescribed form, sufficed as a certificate of repossession. The appellant's right to repossess the property arose upon issuance of the letter, and the suit was not time barred. The appellant had locus standi to sue, and the consen…