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, 04:28 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

12 Jan 2024

Civil Procedure [2024] UGHCCD 9

Ham Enterprises Uganda Limited and 2 Others v Katende and Others (Consolidated Suits)

Ham Enterprises Uganda Limited and 2 Others v Katende and Others (Consolidated Suits) (Miscellaneous Application 307 of 2023) [2024] UGHCCD 9 (12 January 2024)

Court: HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Case number: Miscellaneous Application 307 of 2023
Judge: Musa Ssekaana, J

The court found that the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 717 of 2021 contained a clerical error regarding which suit was withdrawn by the 5th respondent. The error was in referencing HCCS No. 822/2017 instead of HCCS No. 330/2013. The court held that under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, it has the power to correct such clerical mistakes to reflect its true intention, provided the correction does not alter the substance of the judgment. The correction was necessary to avoid distortion of facts and to ensure justice is served. The application was granted, and the ruling and orde…

Source excerpt

Slip Rule
Clerical Error Correction
Judgment Amendment

Read case analysis

21 Mar 2023

Civil Procedure [2023] UGHCCD 258

Retired Col Omara v Abule

Retired Col Omara v Abule (Miscellaneous Application 90 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 258 (21 March 2023)

Court: HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Case number: Miscellaneous Application 90 of 2022
Judge: Adonyo, J

The court found that the reference to Acholi and English as the languages in which the respondent's witness statement was explained was a clerical error. The record from the lower court clearly indicated that the correct languages were Ateso and English. Applying Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act and the slip rule, the court held that it has the power to correct such accidental slips or omissions in its judgment to reflect its true intention, provided the correction does not alter the substance of the judgment. Since the respondent did not contest the application and the correction merely…