Uganda Case Law

Uganda Communications Employees Union and 2 Others v Uganda Telecom Limited and Another (Labour Claim 26 of 2016)

Uganda Communications Employees Union and 2 Others v Uganda Telecom Limited and Another (Labour Claim 26 of 2016) [2025] UGIC 16 (10 March 2025)

Court

Industrial Court of Uganda

Case number

Labour Claim 26 of 2016

Judges

Wabwire Musana, J, Namara, Panel Member, Nabirye, Matovu

The Industrial Court declared NSSF’s witness hostile and allowed UTL to cross-examine him, finding the respondents’ interests were adverse on statutory contributions.

• Hostile Witness
• Cross Examination
• Statutory Contributions
• Adverse Interest
• Evidence Act
• Labour Disputes

Uganda v Ssegonga Musa

Uganda v Ssegonga Musa (Criminal Session 131 of 2017) [2023] UGHC 245 (11 October 2023)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Session 131 of 2017

Judge

Bukirwa, J

The court found that PW3's oral testimony in court was materially inconsistent with his prior police statement, demonstrating a departure from his earlier position and undermining his credibility. The court, guided by Okwanga Anthony v Uganda and relevant statutory provisions, held that it has discretion to declare a witness hostile where such inconsistencies exist. The court rejected the defence's argument regarding the reading back of the police statement, noting that PW3 acknowledged and signed the statement. The court further held, following Rajesh Yadav & Anr. v State of U.P. and related…

Source excerpt

• Hostile Witness
• Witness Credibility
• Rape Trial Procedure
• Evidence Act Application

Esiya v Uganda

Esiya v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 2015) [2023] UGCA 117 (16 March 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 2015

Judge

Cheborion, JA, Obura, JA, Musoke, JA

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge correctly disregarded the evidence of the hostile witness (PW5) and did not rely on it for conviction. The appellant was positively identified at the scene of the crime in broad daylight by witnesses who knew him well, and the conditions for identification were favorable. The appellant's alibi was inconsistent and full of falsehoods, and the prosecution's evidence placed him at the scene beyond reasonable doubt. However, the court determined that the death sentence was manifestly harsh and excessive, as the case did not meet the threshold of the…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Identification Evidence
• Sentencing Guidelines
• Hostile Witness
• Alibi
• Mitigating And Aggravating Factors

Auruku v Icuka

Auruku v Icuka (Civil Appeal No. 30 of 2020) [2023] UGHC 33 (19 January 2023)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 30 of 2020

Judge

Adonyo, J

The appellate court found that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to the appellant, as it operates as a defence for a party against whom an action to recover land is brought, not for a plaintiff seeking recovery. The evidence established that there were three gardens, but the land mortgaged by the respondent and the land sold to the appellant were distinct. Ononge Washington, a key witness to both transactions, consistently testified that the garden occupied by the respondent was not sold to the appellant but was mortgaged and later redeemed by the respondent. The trial magistrate…

Source excerpt

• Ownership Dispute
• Limitation Periods
• Evidence Evaluation
• Hostile Witness
• Mortgage Vs Sale

Kayita Emmanuel v Uganda - Criminal Appeal No 2 of 1998

Kayita Emmanuel v Uganda - Criminal Appeal No 2 of 1998 (Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 1998) [1999] UGHC 2 (27 July 1999)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 1998

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, setting aside an indecent assault conviction because the child complainant’s evidence lacked required corroboration.

• Indecent Assault
• Corroboration Requirements
• Child Witness Evidence
• Appeal On Conviction
• Hostile Witness
• Standard Of Proof

Ruadiba v Rex (Cr. App. No. 44/1938)

Ruadiba v Rex (Cr. App. No. 44/1938) [1938] EACA 52 (1 January 1938)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Cr. App. No. 44/1938

Judge

Gamble, J. (Uganda), Johnston, Ag. J. (Uganda), Whitley CJ

The East African Court of Appeal held that a prosecution witness’s prior deposition could not be used to discredit her without following section 155 of the Indian Evidence Act.

• Hostile Witness
• Use Of Depositions
• Self Defence
• Provocation
• Murder Vs Manslaughter
• Hostile-witness