JurisAssist Uganda Case Law
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
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Uganda case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative Law [2025] UGLCT 1

Inspectorate of Government v Balondemu David (LCT No. 47 of 2024)

Inspectorate of Government v Balondemu David (LCT No. 47 of 2024) [2025] UGLCT 1 (27 March 2025)

Court
Leadership Code Tribunal of Uganda
Case number
LCT No. 47 of 2024
Judges
Karugonjo, Chairperson, Kiyingi, Deputy Chairperson, Okelowange, Panel Member, Bakunzi, Nalunga

The Tribunal found that the Respondent, as Chairperson of the Kampala District Land Board, is a leader within the meaning of the Leadership Code Act, specifically covered under paragraph 31 of the Second Schedule. The Act mandates all leaders specified therein to submit declarations of income, assets, and liabilities to the Inspectorate of Government, regardless of whether the office holder receives a salary, allowance, or no remuneration. The Tribunal rejected the Respondent's argument that only salaried government employees are required to declare, noting that the law is blind to the type o…

Source excerpt

  • Leadership Code Compliance
  • Asset Declaration Requirements
  • Public Officer Definition
  • Remedies For Breach
  • Constitutional Interpretation Requests
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2024] UGCC 29

Turyahabwa v Attorney General and Another (Consitutional Petition 50 of 2017)

Turyahabwa v Attorney General and Another (Consitutional Petition 50 of 2017) [2024] UGCC 29 (12 August 2024)

Court
Constitutional Court of Uganda
Case number
Consitutional Petition 50 of 2017
Judge
Buteera, DCJ, Cheborion, JCC, Kibeedi Mutangula, JCC, Monica K. Mugenyi, JCC, Eva K. Luswata, JA/JCC

The Constitutional Court held that Section 41(1) and (2) of the Anti-Corruption Act, 2009 does not contravene Article 28(3)(a) or (4) of the Constitution. The Court found that the impugned provisions are rationally connected to the legitimate objective of combating corruption and do not violate the presumption of innocence or privilege against self-incrimination. The request for a sworn statement from the accused is a lawful investigative tool, not an unconstitutional compulsion to self-incriminate, and is proportionate to the public interest in preventing corruption. The Court further held t…

Source excerpt

  • Presumption Of Innocence
  • Self Incrimination
  • Anti Corruption Legislation
  • Leadership Code Compliance
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Public Officer Liability
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.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.