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
Ssenkubuge v Tamale (Taxation Reference 294 of 2019) [2024] UGCA 262 (12 September 2024)
The Court of Appeal reduced a UGX 38 million instruction-fee award in an election-related taxation reference to UGX 15 million, finding the original sum excessive.
Mugisha v Kajara and 2 Others (Taxation Reference 313 of 2019) [2024] UGCA 5 (19 January 2024)
The Court found that the advocates in personal conduct at the Court of Appeal possessed valid practicing certificates, and thus costs could be awarded for their services. The Taxing Officer's award of instruction fees was manifestly excessive given the appeal was dismissed on a technicality and did not proceed to a full hearing. The Court applied the principles under the Court of Appeal Rules and relevant case law, determining that a reasonable instruction fee in the circumstances was Ugx 5,000,000, with transport and disbursements set at Ugx 1,709,000. The reference was allowed, the excessiv…
Source excerpt
Wanyoto v The Electoral Commission and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 169 (20 June 2022)
The Court of Appeal found that the applicant failed to file both the memorandum and record of appeal within the mandatory statutory timelines prescribed for election petition appeals. The reasons advanced for the delay, including alleged difficulties in obtaining certified copies of the judgment and proceedings, were not supported by sufficient documentary evidence or exceptional circumstances. The Court emphasized that the statutory scheme for election petitions requires strict compliance with timelines to ensure expeditious resolution, and that its jurisdiction to extend time is limited whe…
Source excerpt
Namiro and 7 Others v Attorney General and 2 Others (Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2018) [2021] UGCC 26 (11 March 2021)
The Constitutional Court found that the petition did not raise any issues for constitutional interpretation under Article 137(3) of the Constitution. The petition was essentially a disguised appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal in an election petition, which is not within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. The proper avenue for challenging the judgment was through the appellate process or review within the Court of Appeal, not by reframing the grievance as a constitutional question. The Court emphasized that its jurisdiction is limited to matters requiring constitutio…
Source excerpt
Kajara Vs Mugisha (Civil Misc Appeal No. 58 of 2016) [2017] UGCA 122 (21 December 2017)
The Court of Appeal struck out an election petition appeal for failure to serve the notice of appeal in time and for other procedural non-compliance.
Kalungi v Nalumansi and Anor (Election Appeal No. 1 of 2016) [2017] UGHCEP 5 (26 September 2017)
The High Court dismissed an election appeal as incompetent for being filed and served out of time, holding that election petition appeal rules applied.
Kirya Grace Wanzala v Lufafa and Another (Election Petition Application 20 of 2016) [2016] UGCA 92 (15 November 2016)
The court found that the applicant's failure to file the memorandum and record of appeal within the stipulated time was primarily due to delays by High Court officials in availing certified copies of the judgment and proceedings. The applicant demonstrated vigilance in pursuing the documents, and the delay was not attributable to lack of diligence. The court held that errors or delays by court officials constitute sufficient cause for extension of time under Rule 5 of the Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules. The existence of a pending application to strike out the notice of appeal did not bar…
Source excerpt
Brenda Nabukenya v Rebecca Nalwanga Balwana (Taxation Reference No. 208 of 2014) [2015] UGCA 2029 (17 March 2015)
The court found that the Registrar's award of instruction fees for both the appeal and cross-appeal was manifestly excessive given the straightforward nature of the case and the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The court applied the guiding principles for taxation of costs, emphasizing that costs should be reasonable and not used as a weapon against political opponents, especially in election petitions. The court also held that since more than one quarter of the profit costs claimed was disallowed, the costs of drawing, filing, serving the bill, and attending taxation should have been…
Source excerpt
Muyanja Mbabaali v Birekeraawo Nsubuga Mathias (Civil Reference 73 of 2012) [2013] UGCA 2054 (9 April 2013)
The court held that the reference was devoid of merit because there was no decision of law or principle by the Registrar to be referred, as required by Rule 110(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The allegations of bias were unsubstantiated, as no specific Registrar was identified and the facts only showed an administrative oversight, not bias. The pending constitutional matters did not involve the respondent and thus did not justify staying the taxation of costs. The proper course for the appellant's new lawyers would have been to seek an adjournment to prepare for taxation, not to seek a refe…
Source excerpt
Kabatsi v Kawooya and Another (Civil Application 30 of 2007) [2007] UGSC 27 (20 December 2007)
The Supreme Court of Uganda validated a late notice of appeal in an election petition matter and extended time, applying the interest of justice.
