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
Kaddu & Another v Mulindwa & 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application 2769 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 36 (24 February 2025)
The High Court set aside a consent judgment over estate land, finding the parties lacked authority because the estate had no administrators and the consent involved collusion.
Musisi & 2 Others v Kikulwe & Another (Miscellaneous Application 775 of 2024) [2024] UGHCLD 158 (12 June 2024)
The court found that the consent judgement in Civil Suit No.796 of 2007 was entered into without the involvement and authority of all co-administrators of the estate of the late Kimbugwe Erieza, specifically excluding the 1st applicant. Under Section 272 of the Succession Act and relevant case law, all co-administrators must act jointly in transactions affecting the estate. The absence of joint action renders the consent judgement void. The court further held that parties to a suit must all be involved in any consent settlement, and exclusion of any party vitiates the consent. The applicants…
Source excerpt
CTM Uganda Limited & 2 Others v Allmuss Properties Uganda Limited & 3 Others (Civil Appeal 267 of 2018) [2021] UGCA 204 (22 February 2021)
The Court of Appeal upheld a consent judgment challenge in part only on a shareholder-shareholding factual error, but otherwise dismissed the appeal and awarded costs.
Uganda National Roads Authority v. DOTT Services Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 798 of 2017) [2017] UGCommC 205 (21 December 2017)
The High Court declined to order deposit of UGX 7.89 billion into court, finding no sufficient basis to stop payment and dismissing the application with costs.
Kamada v Nakandi & Anor (Misc. Application No. 0775 of 2017) [2017] UGHCLD 364 (9 November 2017)
The court found that the Registrar lacked jurisdiction to review or enter the consent judgment in a matter that was actively before a Judge and subject to an injunction. The applicant, Kamada Bukenya, was not a party to the consent judgment but only a witness in the main suit and had already filed a separate suit on the same subject matter, thus lacking locus standi as an aggrieved party for purposes of review or joinder. The consent judgment was entered in error, without the presence of counsel for all parties, and in circumstances amounting to irregularity, misapprehension, and possible col…
Source excerpt
