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
Rajnikant & Another v Kabushenga (Miscellaneous Application 2709 of 2024) [2024] UGHCLD 292 (9 December 2024)
The High Court granted leave to issue a third-party notice, finding the respondent’s alleged personal liability and involvement in the land transaction justified joinder.
ATC Uganda Limited v Omiya Pachwo Sub County Local Government (Miscellaneous Application 10 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 743 (15 August 2024)
The court found that the indemnity clause in the License Agreement between the Applicant and Respondent was limited to environmental claims and did not extend to claims of trespass or ownership as alleged in the main suit. However, the court held that the Applicant's claim for contribution against the Respondent, as the licensor who asserted ownership and licensed the land to the Applicant, established a sufficient nexus to the subject matter of the main suit. The court reasoned that joining the Respondent as a Third Party would allow for comprehensive determination of all interests in the la…
Source excerpt
Asiimwe v Crown Beverages Limited & Another (Miscellaneous Application 1197 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 45 (25 March 2024)
The High Court granted leave to issue a third party notice, finding the applicant had shown an arguable indemnity claim arising from wrongful dismissal and a loan dispute.
Arrow Aquaculture Africa Ltd v Simusanyukira 23 Ors (MISC. APPLICATION NO. 493 OF 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 138 (20 October 2016)
The court found that while the applicant did not explicitly seek contribution or indemnity, the Uganda Investment Authority (UIA) had a direct nexus to the land in issue, particularly regarding compensation and relocation of the respondents. The UIA was the instrumental party in the compensation process and was better placed to explain the compensation history to the court. The court held that UIA should be joined as a defendant under O.1 r.10(2) CPR, rather than being served with a third party notice, to enable effective adjudication of all issues. There was no sufficient legal nexus between…
Source excerpt
Opportunity Bank (U) Ltd v MAAD Advertising Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 860 of 2014) [2014] UGCommC 177 (22 December 2014)
The High Court granted Opportunity Bank leave to issue a third party notice against Maad Advertising, finding the dispute arose from the same media-services contract.
