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
Baliruno John v Canaansites Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 897 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 67 (13 June 2025)
The High Court set aside an ex parte order in a civil suit, but only on conditions requiring the applicant to pay outstanding and additional witness-related costs.
Tushabe v Musoke (Miscellaneous Application 2641 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 11 (13 January 2025)
The court found that the applicant, as a joint registered proprietor of the land in question, is an aggrieved party within the meaning of Section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act. Although she was not a party to Civil Suit No. 439 of 2015, the ex-parte judgment directly affected her proprietary interest. The court held that the Kibanja interest claimed by the respondent could not be detached from the applicant's legal interest in the land. The absence of service and the applicant's lack of opportunity to be heard constituted sufficient grounds for review. The court emphasized the constitutional…
Source excerpt
Segonga T/A Platinum Associates v Katebalirwe (Miscellaneous Application 807 of 2017) [2024] UGHCCD 110 (15 July 2024)
The High Court set aside ex parte revision proceedings after finding that the applicant’s non-appearance was excusable because of his advocate’s gross negligence.
Black Market Records v Malinga & Others (Miscellaneous Application 2788 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 35 (19 January 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an ex parte order because the supporting affidavit was fatally defective and unsupported by proof of the deponent's capacity.
Nyakana v Luyiga (Miscellaneous Application 452 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 404 (23 November 2023)
The High Court set aside an ex parte taxation ruling after finding the applicant had not been properly served and was denied a hearing.
Wakiso District Land Board v National Forestry Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 2060 of 2022) [2023] UGHCLD 94 (23 March 2023)
The High Court held that Wakiso District Land Board had not been properly served with summons, set aside the ex parte order, and granted leave to defend the suit.
Uganda Muslim Supreme Council and Another v Basssajjabalaba and 3 Others (Civil Revision 3 of 2023) [2023] UGHCCD 18 (14 February 2023)
The High Court found that the Chief Magistrate at Mengo exercised jurisdiction illegally and with material irregularity by granting ex-parte interim orders in MC No. 0142 of 2022 and MA No. 006 of 2023 without valid applications, service, or evidence. The applications were not dated, signed, or sealed, rendering them nullities. The orders issued altered the status quo and disposed of the suit before hearing, contrary to the purpose of interim orders. The contempt proceedings and related applications were invalid as the main suit had been withdrawn and no lawful orders subsisted. The applicant…
Source excerpt
Makerere University Business School v Amolo and 19 Others (Miscellaneous Application 14 of 2022) [2023] UGIC 28 (16 January 2023)
The court found that the Applicant's counsel's absence on compassionate grounds (death of a guardian) constituted sufficient cause for non-appearance, and that the failure to brief another advocate, while negligent, should not be visited on the litigant. The court emphasized that substantive justice and the right to a fair hearing under the Constitution require that the Applicant be allowed to defend the main reference. However, the court also noted the Applicant's repeated non-compliance with court directives and warned that no further adjournments would be tolerated. The application to set…
Source excerpt
Ocira v Okwera (Miscellaneous Application No 11 of 2020) [2020] UGHC 155 (23 July 2020)
The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging taxation proceedings, holding that a pre-taxation meeting was not mandatory and that the hearing was not ex-parte.
Gold Beverages (U) Limited v Muhangura & Another (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 674 OF 2019) [2020] UGHCCD 126 (29 May 2020)
The court found that the applicant, as plaintiff, sought to set aside a dismissal for want of prosecution. The applicable law, Order 17 Rule 5 CPR, does not provide for reinstatement of a suit dismissed for want of prosecution at the instance of the plaintiff in the same court. The only remedies available to such a plaintiff are to appeal the dismissal order or to file a fresh suit, subject to limitation periods. The court distinguished between dismissals for want of prosecution and ex parte dismissals, noting that the latter provides a remedy for defendants under Order 9 Rule 27 CPR, which d…
Source excerpt
