Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 1 court collection
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 04:02 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

27 Nov 2018

Constitutional Law [2018] EACJ 126

Lukwiya v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda and Another

Lukwiya v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda and Another [2018] EACJ 126 (27 November 2018) (First Instance Division)

Court: East African Court of Justice
Judge: Jundu JA, Mugenyi PJ, Ntezilyayo DPJ

The Court held that while the Treaty does not require exhaustion of domestic remedies for admissibility of a Reference, and the Applicant had direct access to the East African Court of Justice under Article 30(1), the Reference was time-barred. The Applicant's arrest and detention occurred between 1st July and 4th August 2015, and he was conditionally released on 4th August 2015. The Reference was filed on 27th October 2015, exceeding the two-month limitation period prescribed by Article 30(2) of the Treaty. The Court found no sufficient justification for the delay after the Applicant's condi…

Source excerpt

Jurisdiction Of Regional Court
Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
Time Barred Actions
Extra Judicial Rendition
Human Rights Abuses
Interpretation Of Treaty

Read case analysis

29 Jun 2011

Administrative Law [2011] EACJ 5

Independent Medical Unit v A.G. of Republic of Kenya and Others

Independent Medical Unit v A.G. of Republic of Kenya and Others (Reference 3 of 2010) [2011] EACJ 5 (29 June 2011)

Court: East African Court of Justice
Case number: Reference 3 of 2010
Judge: Arach-Amoko DPJ, Busingye PJ, Butasi J, Kubo J, Mkwawa J

The Court held that it has jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Treaty, including where references allege human rights violations, as long as the core issue is the interpretation of the Treaty. The Court found that the applicant complied with Rule 24 by subsequently filing its registration certificate. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th respondents, being officers of Kenya and not Partner States or institutions of the Community, were improperly joined and must be struck off. The pleadings disclosed no cause of action against the 5th respondent, who was also struck off. On limitation, the Court found th…