Uganda Case Law

Ssimwogerere alias Ssemwogere v Uganda

Ssimwogerere alias Ssemwogere v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 181 of 2022) [2022] UGHCCRD 77 (21 December 2022)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 181 of 2022

Judge

Muwata, J

The court found that the applicant did not take any necessary steps to prosecute his appeal within the time allowed and did not apply for an extension of time. The applicant's explanations for his inaction were unconvincing, especially since he was released from prison before the appeal was dismissed and made no effort to pursue the appeal thereafter. The delay of over ten years was deemed unreasonable and amounted to an abuse of court process. The court held that reinstatement of the appeal was not justified in the circumstances and dismissed the application.

Source excerpt

• Reinstatement Of Appeal
• Dismissal For Want Of Prosecution
• Unreasonable Delay
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion

Concorp International Ltd v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council

Concorp International Ltd v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (Civil Application No. 366 of 2018; Civil Reference No. 182 of 2016) [2020] UGCA 2183 (21 December 2020)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application No. 366 of 2018 ; Civil Reference No. 182 of 2016

Judge

Kasule, Ag. JA, Musota, JA, Egonda-Ntende, JA

The Court upheld a security-for-costs order, dismissed a reference, and allowed extra time to deposit the ordered sum. The appeal would be struck out if unpaid.

• Security For Costs
• Appeals Procedure
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Company Receivership
• Security-for-costs
• Appeals-procedure

Corncop International Ltd v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council

Corncop International Ltd v Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (Civil Reference Appeal No. 182 of 2016) [2020] UGCA 156 (21 December 2020)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Reference Appeal No. 182 of 2016

Judge

Kasule, Ag JA, Egonda-Ntende, JA, Musota, JA

The Court of Appeal upheld an order requiring Concorp International Ltd to deposit security for costs, rejected a time objection, and refused to strike out the appeal.

• Security For Costs
• Appeal Procedure
• Company Receivership
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Security-for-costs
• Civil-appeal-procedure

Mayambala and 3 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority

Mayambala and 3 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority (Civil Appeal 31 of 2014) [2020] UGCA 2156 (24 March 2020)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 31 of 2014

Judge

Musoke, JA, Musota, JA, Kasule, Ag. JA

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent had no legal basis to collect the impugned taxi park fees, rendering the collection unlawful. The Constitution obligates courts to ensure victims of such wrongs are compensated, and government agencies are not exempt from refunding illegally collected monies. The trial Judge erred in treating the refund as discretionary; the law provides clear guidance that such refunds must be ordered. The argument that the appellants benefited from services funded by the illegal taxes does not absolve the respondent from its obligation to refund. However, the qua…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review Of Administrative Action
• Illegal Tax Collection
• Refund Of Unlawful Taxes
• Award Of Costs
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Compensation For Unlawful Expropriation

Ongom Vs Sebunya

Ongom Vs Sebunya (Reference No. 50 of 2013) [2015] UGCA 43 (12 June 2015)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Reference No. 50 of 2013

Judge

Nshimye, JA

The Court of Appeal granted an interim stay of execution, finding the Registrar wrongly held there was no serious threat of execution and misapplied discretion.

• Stay Of Execution
• Interim Orders
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Costs Award
• Threat Of Execution
• Stay-of-execution

National Enterprises Corporation vs Mukisa Foods Ltd

National Enterprises Corporation vs Mukisa Foods Ltd (Civil Appeal No 42 of 1997) [1998] UGCA 7 (2 July 1998)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No 42 of 1997

The Court of Appeal set aside an ex parte judgment, holding that the trial judge had not exercised discretion judicially and that the amended plaint should have been served.

• Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Service Of Amended Plaint
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Setting-aside-ex-parte-judgment
• Amendment-of-pleadings