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
Musiisi v Kanakulya (Civil Appeal No. 171 of 2015) [2022] UGCA 10 (25 January 2022)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a second appeal over bibanja land, holding that the appellant had not proved an out-of-time appeal or shown any basis to disturb the first appellate court.
Busonya & 2 Ors v Giruli [2018] UGSC 50 (28 September 2018)
The Supreme Court upheld a retrial order, holding that unsealed annexures were a curable procedural irregularity and that the Court of Appeal properly re-evaluated the evidence.
Luswata Vs Musisi (Civil Appeal No. 144 of 2012) [2015] UGHCCD 140 (27 April 2015)
The High Court allowed a land appeal, finding the magistrate misread the evidence, wrongly raised fraud, and awarded unproved general damages.
Kalinabiri v Kalule (Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2010) [2011] UGHC 87 (5 July 2011)
The appeal was dismissed because the affidavit in support of the application was defective to the extent that the deponent lacked authority to swear on behalf of another defendant, but was acceptable as far as it referred to the deponent himself. Allegations of fraud were not specifically pleaded or proved as required by law, rendering them speculative and not actionable. The application for stay of proceedings was properly refused since the High Court suit had been dismissed and there was no pending matter to justify a stay. The trial magistrate had jurisdiction, and objections raised after…
Source excerpt
Yovani Tibakwanika v Hajati Yudaya Nalongo Namagembe (Civil Suit No. 597 of 2006) [2007] UGCommC 59 (7 June 2007)
The court found that the plaintiff's suit was time-barred under both the 12-year limitation for actions on judgments and the 6-year limitation for actions founded on contract, as the agreement and judgment both dated from 1992 and the suit was filed in 2006. The court rejected the plaintiff's reliance on Section 25 of the Limitation Act, holding that the alleged fraudulent conduct—namely, the defendant's disappearance—occurred in 1992 and was discoverable at that time, not in 2006. The court further held that the plaintiff failed to specifically plead fraud as required by the Civil Procedure…
Source excerpt
Essaji v Karachiwalla Limited (C.A. 8/1936.) [1936] EACA 63 (1 January 1936)
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant could trade under his own name, which he had long been known by, and that passing-off was not proved.
