Uganda
Sign in
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

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [1950] EACA 406

Ross v Reginam

Ross v Reginam (Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 1955) [1950] EACA 406 (1 January 1950)

The Court of Appeal quashed tax-evasion convictions because the trial judge’s summing-up was materially inadequate and ordered a retrial.

  • Income Tax Evasion
  • Excess Profits Tax
  • Jury Directions
  • Admissibility Of Evidence
  • Sentencing Provisions
  • Criminal-appeals
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1945] EACA 31

Rex v Francesco

Rex v Francesco (Criminal Appeal No. 214 of 1945) [1945] EACA 31 (1 January 1945)

The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa upheld a murder conviction, holding that a 12-month-old grievance was not legal provocation and that intent to cause grievous harm could amount to malice aforethought.

  • Murder
  • Provocation
  • Malice Aforethought
  • Jury Directions
  • Intent
  • Penal Code Interpretation
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1941] EACA 71

Rex v Retief

Rex v Retief (Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 1941) [1941] EACA 71 (1 January 1941)

The Court of Appeal upheld a murder conviction, holding that drunkenness is no excuse unless it induces insanity or prevents formation of intent.

  • Murder
  • Drunkenness Defence
  • Insanity
  • Malice Aforethought
  • Jury Directions
  • Criminal-law
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1936] EACA 124

Rex v Kinei (Cr.A. Nos. 137 and 138 of 1936 (consolidated).)

Rex v Kinei (Cr.A. Nos. 137 and 138 of 1936 (consolidated).) [1936] EACA 124 (1 January 1936)

The Court held that rape convictions should not rest on uncorroborated complainant evidence without a proper warning to the assessors; the appeals were allowed.

  • Rape
  • Corroboration Requirement
  • Evidence Of Complainant
  • Jury Directions
  • Sexual Offences
  • Corroboration
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1932] EACA 26

Rex v Hulatt (Cr. App. .142/1932.)

Rex v Hulatt (Cr. App. .142/1932.) [1932] EACA 26 (1 January 1932)

The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that section 245(2)(e) of the Penal Code must be strictly construed and does not create a rebuttable presumption.

  • Theft
  • Penal Code Interpretation
  • Jury Directions
  • Presumptions In Criminal Law
  • Criminal-law
  • Statutory-interpretation
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1932] EACA 23

Rex v Ross (Cr. App. 205/1932.)

Rex v Ross (Cr. App. 205/1932.) [1932] EACA 23 (1 January 1932)

The Court held that the law in Kenya regarding the insanity defence is the same as in England under the McNaughton Rules. The presumption of sanity stands unless the accused proves legal insanity at the time of the act. The trial judge correctly directed the jury that the burden of proof for insanity rests on the accused, who must satisfy the jury beyond reasonable doubt. The judge adequately reviewed the medical and factual evidence, and exclusion of scientific journal reports and certain evidence was proper. The jury was entitled to accept the accused's own account of the events, which did…

  • Insanity Defence
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Murder
  • Jury Directions
  • Presumption Of Sanity
Read case analysis

About this JurisAssist collection

Uganda decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.