Uganda Case Law

Sentongo v Katende & Another

Sentongo v Katende & Another (Miscellaneous Application 2436 of 2024) [2025] UGHCLD 22 (28 January 2025)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 2436 of 2024

Judge

Naluzze Aisha Batala, J

The court found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the extension of time to file an appeal. The medical reports submitted did not establish that the applicant was hospitalized at Mengo Hospital for the period claimed or that he was incapacitated from filing the appeal. Furthermore, the applicant was aware of the judgment delivery date, which was communicated in his presence and that of his counsel. The court concluded that the applicant was guilty of dilatory conduct and had not demonstrated any grounds warranting the exercise of the court's discretion to exte…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Appeal Out Of Time
• Dilatory Conduct
• Medical Grounds
• Judgment Delivery
• Costs Award

Okello v Uganda

Okello v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 77 of 2020) [2023] UGCA 138 (18 May 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 77 of 2020

Judge

Egonda-Ntende, JA, Mulyagonja, JA, Bamugemereire, JA

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge failed to deliver a written or reasoned judgment as mandated by section 86(1) of the Trial on Indictments Act. The record lacked any summing up to assessors, a formal pronouncement of judgment, or reasons for the sentence imposed. These omissions constituted fundamental procedural irregularities, rendering the trial a nullity. The absence of a valid judgment deprived the appellant of the basis for an appeal and violated statutory requirements. Given the length of time the appellant had already spent in custody and the gravity of the procedural de…

Source excerpt

• Aggravated Robbery
• Trial Procedure
• Judgment Delivery
• Mistrial
• Sentencing
• Appeals Process

Wamai and Others v Reginam

Wamai and Others v Reginam (Criminal Appeals No. 1051 and 1052 of 1954) [1955] EACA 330 (1 January 1955)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeals No. 1051 and 1052 of 1954

Judge

Nihill P, Sir Enoch Jenkins, JA, Worley VP

The Court held that a person acquitted of murder cannot lawfully be convicted as an accessory after the fact to that murder unless specifically charged with that offence, as accessory after the fact is not minor and cognate to murder. This principle, affirmed in Velezi Kashizha v. R., applies equally under the Criminal Procedure Codes of Uganda, Kenya, and Tanganyika. The Court further held that delivery of judgment is an integral part of the trial, and the discretion to exclude the public under section 77 of the Criminal Procedure Code extends to judgment delivery, but must be exercised only…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Accessory After The Fact
• Open Court Principle
• Judgment Delivery
• Judicial Discretion
• Trial Procedure

Lengobe and Another v Rex

Lengobe and Another v Rex (Criminal Appeals Nos. 90 and 91 of 1951) [1951] EACA 193 (1 January 1951)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeals Nos. 90 and 91 of 1951

Judge

Lockhart-Smith, J, Nihill P, Worley VP

The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa upheld murder convictions, holding that judgment after assessors’ opinions must be delivered with reasonable despatch.

• Murder Conviction
• Trial Delay
• Judgment Delivery
• Provocation Defence
• Age Of Accused
• Murder-conviction