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
Galaxy Concepts Ltd and Others v Equity Bank (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 1135 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 105 (30 May 2025)
The court entered judgment for the bank on the admitted principal sum of USD 331,100, but granted unconditional leave to defend the disputed balance and interest claims.
International Medical Link and Others v Equity Bank (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 2177 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 99 (23 May 2025)
The High Court granted the applicants unconditional leave to defend a summary suit, finding a bona fide dispute over the loan amount that required an account to be taken.
Parambot Distillers Limited and Another v Standard Chartered Bank (U) Limited (Civil Application No. 65 of 2025) [2025] UGCA 118 (5 May 2025)
The Court of Appeal granted a stay of execution pending appeal, finding the applicants had arguable grounds and faced imminent execution risk.
Ratidu Trading Ltd and Others v Equity Bank (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 2646 of 2023) [2025] UGCommC 56 (10 April 2025)
The court found that the applicants failed to present any genuine defense or triable issue to merit unconditional leave to appear and defend the summary suit. Their assertions of repayment were unsupported by evidence, and their challenges to the mortgage and foreclosure process did not address the central issue of indebtedness. The applicants' conduct amounted to approbation and reprobation, undermining their credibility. The law requires a defendant to disclose a bona fide triable issue with sufficient particularity, which the applicants did not do. The obligations of the guarantors remain…
Source excerpt
Obeta v Centenary Rural Development Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application 1832 of 2024) [2024] UGCommC 366 (24 December 2024)
The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate good cause to set aside the ex parte judgment entered in the summary suit. The Family Division judgment only voided the mortgages, not the underlying loan agreement or the applicant's liability as guarantor. The guarantee is a separate and enforceable obligation, and the respondent is entitled to pursue the guarantor without first proceeding against the principal borrower or mortgaged properties. The applicant's evidence of satisfaction of the judgment debt was unreliable and unsubstantiated. Procedural defects in citing the wrong rule w…
Source excerpt
I & M Bank Uganda Limited v Pluto Pharmaceuticals Limited and Others (Civil Suit No. 471 of 2024) [2024] UGCommC 388 (24 September 2024)
The High Court found the defendants jointly and severally liable for breaching loan facility terms and ordered payment of the outstanding sum, damages, interest, and costs.
Uganda Development Bank Limited v Bulamu Coffee Buyers, Processors & Exporters Limited & 2 Others (Civil Suit 1093 of 2020) [2024] UGCommC 302 (23 September 2024)
The court found the borrower breached a trade finance facility and held the guarantors jointly liable. The counterclaim failed, and the plaintiff recovered UGX 797,059,162.67 plus interest and costs.
Bitature v ABSA Bank (U) Limited (Miscellaneous Application 2424 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 299 (16 September 2024)
The High Court dismissed Patrick Bitature’s application for unconditional leave to defend a summary suit, finding no bona fide triable issue and holding that his guarantor liability was independently enforceable.
Tibiri v Tropical Bank Limited & Another (Civil Suit 487 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 304 (3 September 2024)
The court found that the 2nd Defendant did not default on the loan facility, as the bank statement (PE 3) reflected full payment, including the large deposit by Nanyunja Zahara, and no evidence was adduced by the 1st Defendant to prove reversal of the transaction or continued indebtedness. Consequently, the Plaintiff, as guarantor, was discharged from liability, and the 1st Defendant's continued retention of the Plaintiff's land title was unjustified. The Plaintiff was entitled to the release of her certificate of title, general damages for inconvenience, and costs of the suit. The court decl…
Source excerpt
Rwankote v Zziwa & Another (Civil Suit 940 of 2021) [2024] UGCommC 258 (19 August 2024)
The High Court found the defendants liable for breach of an undertaking to repay UGX 200 million and held the second defendant liable as guarantor.
