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
Opiyo Otiiti v Nyeko and 2 Others (Misc Cause 13 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 263 (12 September 2023)
The High Court dismissed a human-rights complaint against three State Attorneys, holding they were only representing clients and owed no special duty to the applicant.
Opiyo Otiiti v Kwezira (Misc Cause 15 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 262 (12 September 2023)
The court held that suits against judicial officers for acts or decisions taken in the exercise of judicial power are unmaintainable at law due to constitutional and statutory judicial immunity. Article 128(4) of the Constitution of Uganda provides absolute protection to judicial officers from any action or suit for acts or omissions in the exercise of judicial power. This immunity is reinforced by the Judicature Act and the Government Proceedings Act, which extend protection to persons executing judicial orders and exclude government liability for judicial acts. The Human Rights (Enforcement…
Source excerpt
Mavid Pharmacenticals Limited v Royal Group of Pakistan and Another (Miscellaneous Application 871 of 2020) [2021] UGCommC 179 (5 October 2021)
The court found that although the respondent's compliance with conditional orders of stay of execution was delayed and partial, the circumstances justified validation of the belated deposit as substantial compliance, invoking equitable principles. The order of stay of execution pending appeal remains valid. Money deposited in court as security for costs is held in custodia legis and is not subject to attachment or garnishment without leave of court; the judgment debtor does not have disposing power over such funds until the specific purpose for which they were deposited is fulfilled. The prop…
Source excerpt
Cissy Kawuma Mudhasi v Attorney GeneraI (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 470 of 2021) [2021] UGHC 44 (28 July 2021)
The High Court granted an injunction stopping criminal investigations into a judicial officer’s work, finding a prima facie case, irreparable harm, and that the balance of convenience favoured relief.
Bozongoza Alex t/a Express Integrity Auctioneers and Bailiffs v Oryem (Civil Revision No. 2 of 2020) [2020] UGHC 148 (23 July 2020)
The Chief Magistrate's Court exceeded its jurisdiction under the small claims procedure by awarding a total sum of shs. 13,000,000/=, surpassing the statutory pecuniary limit of shs. 10,000,000/=. Furthermore, the claim for recovery of the purchase price following a sale in execution of a decree should have been determined by the executing court under section 34(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, not by a separate suit. The applicant, as a court bailiff, was protected by qualified immunity for acts done in execution of a warrant unless shown to have acted illegally or in excess of authority, whic…
Source excerpt
Opiyo v M/S M. Oyet & Co Advocates & 4 Ors (CIVIL SUIT No. 0019 OF 2016) [2018] UGHCCD 43 (13 September 2018)
The High Court struck out a suit against a judge and advocates, holding the plaint disclosed no cause of action because judicial and advocate immunity applied.
Attorney General v Nakibuule (Constitutional Appeal 2 of 2016) [2018] UGSC 62 (11 July 2018)
The Supreme Court held that judicial immunity under Article 128(4) is not absolute and does not bar Judicial Service Commission disciplinary proceedings.
Attorney General v Nakibuule (Constitutional Appeal 2 of 2016) [2018] UGSC 61 (11 July 2018)
The Supreme Court held that judicial immunity under Article 128(4) of the Constitution protects judicial officers from civil suits for acts or omissions in the exercise of judicial power, but does not shield them from disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The JSC, as a constitutional body, is mandated to receive and process complaints against judicial officers and to conduct disciplinary proceedings. The Court found no evidence that the JSC's actions in preferring charges against the respondent or in conducting disciplinary proceedings were inconsistent…
Source excerpt
Muwisa & 2 Ors v Biguyi & Anor (HCT – 01 – LD – CA – 0041 OF 2013) [2016] UGHCLD 50 (20 December 2016)
The High Court allowed an appeal over disputed land, holding that the seller lacked title and could not pass ownership. The third appellant was wrongly joined and discharged.
Angulu George v Rep Of Uganda (Civil App. No. 8 Of 2007) (Civil App. No. 8 of 2007) [2008] UGHC 94 (29 August 2008)
The High Court of Uganda allowed a criminal appeal, set aside convictions for criminal trespass, and acquitted both appellants after finding the proof deficient.
