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
Karenzi George and Another v Muramuri Pidson and Mwesigwa Fred (Civil Appeal 20 of 2025) [2025] UGCA 201 (17 June 2025)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a second appeal in a land dispute, holding it could not re-open factual findings and rejecting a late bid to amend the appeal.
Lt. Moro and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 370 of 2017) [2023] UGCA 32 (30 January 2023)
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the Court Martial Appeal Court except where the conviction involves a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The statutory framework, specifically Regulation 20 of the Uganda People's Defence Forces (Court Martial Appeal Court) Regulations, makes decisions of the Court Martial Appeal Court final, with only a narrow exception for death or life imprisonment sentences. The appellants were sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, which does not fall within the exception. Jurisdiction is fundamental and cannot be conferred by consent or…
Source excerpt
Kasiita and 2 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 57 of 2018) [2022] UGCA 239 (28 September 2022)
The Court of Appeal held that it lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals from the Court Martial Appeal Court, as appellate jurisdiction must be expressly conferred by statute. Regulation 20 of the Uganda People's Defence Forces (Court-Martial Appeal Court) Regulations provides that decisions of the Court Martial Appeal Court are final. The UPDF Act does not grant a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Court Martial Appeal Court. Therefore, the appeal before the Court of Appeal is incompetent and must be struck out. The court declined to consider the merits of the grounds raised by the a…
Source excerpt
Kyomuhangi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 131 of 2020) [2021] UGCA 139 (3 November 2021)
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the Court Martial Appeal Court except where the sentence is death or life imprisonment, as expressly provided by Regulation 20(2) of the UPDF (Court Martial Appeal Court) Regulations S.I 307-7. The appellant was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment, which does not fall within the jurisdictional exception. The right to appeal is statutory and cannot be implied or inferred. The appellant's conviction and sentence were reviewed by multiple military courts, satisfying both domestic and international requirements for appellate review.…
Source excerpt
Baigana v Uganda [2019] UGSC 10 (28 June 2019)
The Supreme Court found that the appellant had, in substance, satisfied the sentence by payment of the fine, as evidenced by the cashier's acknowledgment and the appellant's release from custody, despite the absence of a formal receipt. Therefore, the imposition of the default sentence of imprisonment by the Court of Appeal was unwarranted and illegal, as imprisonment in default of a fine must terminate upon payment. The Court of Appeal also erred in enhancing the compensation order by imposing interest and a strict payment deadline without proper cause or hearing, exceeding its appellate pow…
Source excerpt
Beatrice Kobusingye v Fiona Nyakana & Anor (Civil Appeal 18 of 2001) [2002] UGSC 42 (23 May 2002)
The Supreme Court held that a third appeal from a Magistrate's court to the Supreme Court is only competent if the record of appeal includes a certificate from the Court of Appeal that the appeal concerns a matter of law of great public or general importance, or an order of the Supreme Court granting leave. The absence of these essential documents renders the appeal incompetent. The court exercised its discretion to allow the respondents to raise the preliminary objection at the hearing, noting that the delay was due to inadvertence and that the appellant had sufficient notice and opportunity…
Source excerpt
Johnston v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 165 of 1951) [1951] EACA 278 (1 January 1951)
The Court held that no appeal lay from a High Court decision on a case stated under the Criminal Procedure Code, except for genuine jurisdictional objections.
