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
Mwomezi and Others v Reginam (Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 1955) [1950] EACA 434 (1 January 1950)
Criminal appeal on arson, attempted murder and conspiracy. The Court upheld convictions and held that cross-examination evidence about other misconduct was admissible only to assess the witness's credibility.
Nyamu and Another v Reginam (Criminal Appeal Nos. 552 and 553 of 1955) [1950] EACA 484 (1 January 1950)
The statement "We have one gun" made by the appellants to the Tribal Police Reserve constituted a confession under the law, as it admitted possession of a firearm without lawful authority. However, its admission in evidence was inadmissible under section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as amended. Despite this error, the trial judge did not rely on the inadmissible confession in his judgment, and there was sufficient other evidence to support the convictions. The procedural irregularity in admitting the extra-judicial statements was not substantial enough to cause injustice or warrant ov…
Source excerpt
Osigai v Reginam (Criminal Appeal No. 243 of 1956) [1950] EACA 586 (1 January 1950)
Appeal allowed in a murder conviction case after the court found the confession inadmissible and unsafe, due to translation defects and irregular police questioning.
Rex v Ginhill (Criminal Appeal No. 200 of 1948) [1948] EACA 45 (1 January 1948)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that a murder confession taken by a District Commissioner acting as a police officer was inadmissible, and the conviction could not stand.
Rex v Kasule and Others (Criminal Appeals Nos. 184, 185 and 186 of 1948 (Consolidated)) [1948] EACA 48 (1 January 1948)
The Court of Appeal held that the statements made by the first and third appellants to the gombolola chief were not voluntary and should not have been admitted in evidence. The Court reasoned that the circumstances—being brought bound before a person in authority and being told 'Tell me how you killed your father'—amounted to a peremptory order, not a mere request, and would lead an accused to believe he was compelled to speak. The absence of a caution and the trial judge's own finding that the accused probably did not consider he could remain silent further supported the conclusion that the…
Source excerpt
Rex v Kabutui (Criminal Appeal 153/1934.) [1935] EACA 60 (1 January 1935)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that a confession elicited by a magistrate without warning, especially after an earlier inadmissible confession, was not voluntary and was inadmissible.
