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
Kataabu v Kayongo and Another (Miscellaneous Application 573 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 210 (7 July 2023)
The High Court found the 1st respondent in contempt for transferring land contrary to a consent decree and fined him UGX 5,000,000, with jail on default.
Kobutugu v Ihora Museveni (Miscellaneous Application No. 117 of 2020) [2021] UGHCCD 223 (22 October 2021)
The High Court at Masaka dismissed a contempt application because there was no affidavit of service proving the respondent had been served with the application.
Teopista Nabbale and Another v Namatovu (Civil Application No. 0158 of 2016) [2017] UGCA 151 (6 November 2017)
The Court found that the applicants exercised due diligence in obtaining the evidence and brought the application without undue delay. The documents sought to be adduced are relevant, credible, and may have an important influence on the outcome of the appeal. The respondent failed to demonstrate any prejudice that would result from the admission of the evidence. The Court emphasized that substantive justice should prevail over technicalities and that the interests of justice require that the appeal be determined on its merits with all pertinent evidence available. Accordingly, the application…
Source excerpt
Kanyeihamba v Nile Construction General Contractors Ltd & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 485 of 2016) [2016] UGHCLD 25 (11 November 2016)
The High Court rejected a review application over a land transfer order, holding that the applicant showed no new evidence, error, or sufficient reason for review.
Nyakana & Anor v Nsubuga & Anor (M.A No.729 of 2012 2007) [2013] UGHCLD 6 (31 January 2013)
The court found that the 1st respondent had already subdivided and sold the suit land to Urban Utility Consults Ltd prior to the issuance of the temporary injunction. The subsequent transfers and registrations were conducted by third parties, namely the Registrar of Titles and Urban Utility Consults Ltd, over whom the 1st respondent had no control. The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence that the 1st respondent willfully disobeyed the court order. The court emphasized that detention in civil prison for contempt should only be imposed in cases of clear and flagrant disrespect, and…
Source excerpt
Kazzora v Rukuba (Civil Application No. 4/91) [1991] UGSC 31 (18 March 1991)
The Supreme Court of Uganda struck out a stay application as incompetent because key documents were missing, including the judgment appealed from and the High Court stay ruling.
