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
Mugenyi and Another v Nasuna (Civil Appeal 40 of 2022) [2025] UGCommC 52 (28 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed an appeal over a judicial sale, holding that the sale could be set aside because the ex parte judgment underpinning execution had been invalidated.
Kasukali v Kiiza (HCT-01-CV-CS-LD 37 of 2019) [2025] UGHC 135 (28 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed a land claim over a plot in Kyenjojo, finding the plaintiff failed to prove ownership and that the judicial sale and eviction were unlawful.
Zimbe v Uganda and 2 Others (Civil Appeal 11 of 2023) [2024] UGHCLD 120 (29 April 2024)
The High Court found that the learned Chief Magistrate erred in law by holding that objector proceedings could not be entertained after the sale of the property. The court clarified that, under Ugandan law and established precedent, a judicial sale of immovable property may be set aside if the objector proves possession and interest at the date of attachment, regardless of whether the sale has already occurred. The appellant provided credible evidence of ownership and possession prior to attachment, which was not rebutted by the respondents. The 2nd respondent admitted he no longer owned the…
Source excerpt
Kisembo v Bundibugyo Energy Co-operative Society Limited and Another (Civil Appeal 2 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 222 (19 April 2024)
The court found that the sale of motor vehicle Reg No. UG033K was not absolute at the time the objector proceedings were filed, as the application to set aside the sale was made within a reasonable time after the sale. The evidence showed that the motor vehicle was government property, with title remaining with the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, and not the 1st respondent. The appellant, as manager and signatory to the memorandum of understanding, was aware of this fact. Therefore, the attachment and sale of the motor vehicle was illegal and could not be used to satisfy the priva…
Source excerpt
Kafeero-Ssentongo v Mugenyi & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 670 of 2019) [2020] UGHCEBD 6 (4 September 2020)
The court found that the valuation of the property was conducted by Dr. Ochwo, who was not registered or licensed under the Surveyors Registration Act, and whose credentials and firm lacked sufficient certification and traceability. As a result, there was no lawful valuation in the eyes of the law, rendering the subsequent sale of Plot 213 Block 323, Nyendo, Masaka invalid. The approval of the valuation by the deputy registrar was immaterial given the lack of qualification of the valuer. Furthermore, the attempted execution against the Nalukolongo property was unlawful as no application or wa…
Source excerpt
Masiko v Imaniraguha & 2 Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 1481 of 2016) [2017] UGHCLD 46 (27 April 2017)
The court found that a lawful court order for attachment and sale of the suit property existed and was known to the Respondents, particularly the 2nd Respondent. The Respondents failed to comply with the order, instead taking deliberate steps to frustrate execution by transferring the property and denying access through armed security. Procedural objections raised by the Respondents did not absolve them of the obligation to comply with the order, as only the issuing court could set aside or stay its own order. The Respondents' conduct amounted to contempt of court. The Applicant, having been…
Source excerpt
Lawrence Muwanga v Stephen Kyeyune (Legal Representative of Christine Kisamba, deceased) [2002] UGSC 5 (19 June 2002)
The Supreme Court held that the non-payment of court fees at the time of instituting objection proceedings does not render the proceedings a nullity. The court has discretion under Rule 6 of the Court Fees, Fines and Deposits Rules to order payment of the requisite fees, and upon such payment, the proceedings are validated. The court found no evidence that the issue of non-payment was raised at trial, and the objector's death and change of counsel made it difficult to ascertain whether fees were paid. The court further held that the property in question had been donated to the widow and child…
Source excerpt
