Uganda Case Law

Modino Furniture Company Limited v Homeart Uganda Limited and Another (Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019)

Modino Furniture Company Limited v Homeart Uganda Limited and Another (Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019) [2024] UGCommC 325 (11 October 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Consolidated Civil Suit 427 of 2020 ; Consolidated Civil Suit 724 of 2019

Judge

Abinyo, J

The court held that Modino Furniture Company Limited is the lawful and registered proprietor of the DOGTAS trademark in Uganda, having complied with all statutory requirements for registration. The Defendants failed to object to the Plaintiff's registration or apply for local protection, and international registration does not confer automatic rights in Uganda. The Defendants' use of the DOGTAS mark without authorization from the registered owner constitutes trademark infringement under Ugandan law. The franchise agreement between the Defendants is inconsequential in the absence of local regi…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Registration
• Trademark Infringement
• International Trademark Protection
• Franchise Agreements
• Territorial Principle
• Remedies For Infringement

Warid Telecom v Punch Telecom (U) Limited

Warid Telecom v Punch Telecom (U) Limited (Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2013) [2022] UGCA 34 (15 February 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2013

Judge

Musota, JA, Mulyagonja, JA, Bamugemereire, JA

The Court of Appeal held that Warid Telecom breached a franchise agreement by terminating without the required notice, but reduced damages and set aside interest.

• Franchise Agreements
• Contract Termination
• General Damages
• Notice Requirements
• Interest Awards
• Franchise-agreements

Apollo Hotel Corporation v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 68 of 2018)

Apollo Hotel Corporation v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 68 of 2018) [2021] UGTAT 4 (27 August 2021)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Application No. TAT 68 of 2018

Judges

Katwe, Panel Member, Ali, Mugenyi, Chairperson

The tribunal found that the rights granted to the applicant under the international license agreement, including the use of the Sheraton brand and system (which encompasses the centralized reservation system), constitute services rather than goods. These services were supplied by Sheraton International Inc., a foreign entity, for use and consumption in Uganda, thereby qualifying as imported services under the VAT Act. Applying the destination principle, VAT is chargeable on such imported services. However, the tribunal determined that the principal service was the right to operate the hotel u…

Source excerpt

• Value Added Tax
• Imported Services
• Franchise Agreements
• Intellectual Property Rights

Parsha International Limited T/a Champion Bet /Slots v Homebet Limited

Parsha International Limited T/a Champion Bet /Slots v Homebet Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application 598 of 2021) [2021] UGCommC 168 (19 July 2021)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Miscellaneous Application 598 of 2021

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award, holding it was not time-barred and disclosed no ground under the Arbitration Act.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Public Policy Exception
• Contractual Compliance
• Franchise Agreements
• Arbitral-award-challenge
• Public-policy-exception

Bwambale v Solar Now Services (U) Ltd (HCT-01-CV-CS-0025-2015)

Bwambale v Solar Now Services (U) Ltd (HCT-01-CV-CS-0025-2015) [2017] UGHCCD 45 (20 April 2017)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

HCT-01-CV-CS-0025-2015

Judge

Ojok, J

The High Court held that Solar Now Services lawfully terminated the franchise agreement on notice, but awarded the plaintiff UGX 2,544,000 with interest.

• Franchise Agreements
• Contract Termination
• Notice Requirements
• Special Damages
• General Damages
• Franchise-agreements