Uganda Case Law

Attorney General v Kikwanzi

Attorney General v Kikwanzi (Miscellaneous Application 750 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 9 (27 January 2025)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 750 of 2024

Judge

Douglas Karekona Singiza, J

The court found that the application was not barred by res judicata because the appellate proceedings addressed procedural matters, not the merits of the dispute. The ex parte judgment was set aside on two main grounds: mistake of counsel, as the Attorney-General's non-appearance was due to professional negligence rather than intentional default, and irregularity, since the mandatory procedure under rule 6 of the Government Proceedings (Civil Procedure) Rules was not followed—no leave was sought or granted before entering default judgment against the government. The court emphasized that stat…

Source excerpt

• Ex Parte Judgment
• Setting Aside Default Judgment
• Mistake Of Counsel
• Government Proceedings
• Res Judicata
• Fair Hearing

Kaggwa v Attorney General

Kaggwa v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application 2028 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 19 (23 January 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 2028 of 2024

Judge

Naluzze Aisha Batala, J

The High Court allowed an application for leave to obtain default judgment after finding the Attorney General had been served and did not file a defence.

• Default Judgment
• Government Proceedings
• Service Of Process
• Default-judgment
• Government-proceedings
• Service-of-process

Nyanzi (As Administratrix of the estate of the late Semei Nyanzi) v Attorney General of Uganda

Nyanzi (As Administratrix of the estate of the late Semei Nyanzi) v Attorney General of Uganda (Civil Suit No. 524 of 2015) [2022] UGHCLD 166 (2 September 2022)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit No. 524 of 2015

Judge

Namanya, Ag. J

The High Court admitted a late defence filed two days out of time, but held the land compensation and recovery suit was time barred and dismissed it.

• Statute Of Limitation
• Compulsory Acquisition
• Recovery Of Land
• Government Proceedings
• Dismissal Of Suit
• Statute-of-limitation

Democratic party & anor v Attorney general & anor

Democratic party & anor v Attorney general & anor (Cause No. 372 of 2013 Out of Eacj Ref 06/2010 & App No. 06 of 2011) [2014] UGHCCD 159 (2 April 2014)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Cause No. 372 of 2013 Out of Eacj Ref 06/2010 & App No. 06 of 2011

Judge

Nyanzi, J

The court held that the application for mandamus was premature because the applicants filed it before obtaining and serving a certificate of order against government as required by section 19 of the Government Proceedings Act. The statutory duty to pay only arises after such certificate is issued and served. Since the application was filed before this mandatory step was completed, there was no legal basis for the issuance of mandamus. The omission was incurable, as the certificate could not retrospectively validate the premature filing. The court relied on established case law and statutory p…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Mandamus
• Government Proceedings
• Certificate Of Order
• Premature Application

Argus Construction & Joinery Ltd v Attorney General (HCT-00-CC-MA 654 of 2006)

Argus Construction & Joinery Ltd v Attorney General (HCT-00-CC-MA 654 of 2006) [2006] UGCommC 40 (1 November 2006)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-00-CC-MA 654 of 2006

The High Court granted mandamus compelling government payment of a decree, holding the application was not time-barred under the judicial review rules.

• Mandamus
• Government Proceedings
• Judgment Enforcement
• Judicial Review Time Limits
• Judicial-review
• Government-proceedings

Maingi v Attorney General (Case No 0095 of 2002)

Maingi v Attorney General (Case No 0095 of 2002) [2002] UGHC 11 (17 May 2002)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Case No 0095 of 2002

The High Court of Uganda entered default judgment against the Attorney General after finding service complied with government proceedings rules. The alternative claim on admission failed.

• Judgment In Default
• Government Proceedings
• Service Of Process
• Civil-procedure
• Government-proceedings
• Judgment-in-default

Soroti Municipal Council v Uganda Land Commission and Attorney General (MISC. APPLICATION NO. 78 OF 1998)

Soroti Municipal Council v Uganda Land Commission and Attorney General (MISC. APPLICATION NO. 78 OF 1998) [1999] UGHC 56 (27 October 1999)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

MISC. APPLICATION NO. 78 OF 1998

Judge

Maniraguha, J

The court held that the funds appropriated by Parliament to the Uganda Land Commission are statutory grants for specific purposes and do not constitute a debt due or accruing due from the Government to the Commission. Section 22 of the Government Proceedings Act is intended to apply to situations where the Government owes a debt that could be attached if owed by a private person, which is not the case here. The relationship between the Government and the Uganda Land Commission regarding these funds is not that of debtor and creditor, but rather one of statutory grant. Therefore, the applicant…

Source excerpt

• Government Proceedings
• Attachment Of Debts
• Appropriation Of Funds
• Restraining Orders
• Execution Of Judgments

Omuron v Public service commission (Misc Cause No 200 of 2009)

Omuron v Public service commission (Misc Cause No 200 of 2009) [2014] UGHCCD 162 (4 April 2014)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc Cause No 200 of 2009

The court held that the application against the Public Service Commission, a government body, cannot proceed directly as the entity is not a legal person and must be sued through the Attorney General in accordance with Article 250(2) of the Constitution and Section 110 of the Government Proceedings Act. The court referenced prior decisions, including CALEB ALAKA –VS– LAW COUNCIL, where similar objections were raised and the matter was referred to the Constitutional Court for interpretation. In light of the pending constitutional reference, the court determined that proceedings in the present…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Government Proceedings
• Prerogative Remedies
• Constitutional Reference