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
Waligo v Wasajja (Civil Appeal 6 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 202 (21 April 2025)
The High Court partly allowed an appeal over crop trespass damages, reducing special damages from UGX 13,362,000 to UGX 1,000,000 while upholding the rest of the trial court’s orders.
Emorut v Anyango and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 43 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 555 (20 June 2024)
The appellate court found that while the appellant did trespass on the suit land in 2009, the tort ceased when he vacated the land and did not continue the unlawful occupation. By 2019, when the suit was filed, there was no evidence of continuing trespass, and the cause of action was time-barred under the Limitation Act. The trial magistrate erred in awarding general damages for trespass and finding the appellant a trespasser at the time of suit. The appeal succeeded only on the ground relating to trespass, with the orders on trespass and general damages set aside. The trial court's findings…
Source excerpt
Kivumbi v Kalemba (Civil Appeal 11 of 2018) [2023] UGHC 125 (25 October 2023)
The High Court dismissed a land appeal, holding the appellant failed to prove a kibanja interest and that the respondent was not a trespasser.
Otto Aita v Akena (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2014) [2020] UGHC 123 (14 August 2020)
The High Court allowed a land appeal, set aside a subdivision order, and dismissed the suit after finding the respondent had not proved exclusive ownership.
Akena v Ayaa (Civil Appeal No. 49 of 2016) [2019] UGHC 34 (29 August 2019)
The High Court upheld a finding that the respondent owned disputed land by gift from her brothers, rejected bias complaints, and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Acayo & 4 Ors Vs Lodik (CIVIL APPEAL No. 054 OF 2017) [2019] UGHCCD 179 (30 May 2019)
The High Court set aside a land judgment after finding the trial court wrongly failed to inspect the locus in quo, and ordered a retrial before a different magistrate.
Okello & 3 Ors Vs Olak (CIVIL APPEAL No. 055 & 64 OF 2016) [2019] UGHCCD 162 (16 May 2019)
The High Court held that the respondent proved ownership of the disputed land, set aside equal subdivision, and ordered the appellants to vacate.
Akena & Ors v Opwonya (Civil Appeal No. 0035 of 2016) [2018] UGHCLD 70 (13 December 2018)
High Court appeal over customary land ownership and adverse possession. The court held the appellants had acquired title by long occupation and allowed the appeal.
Ogwang v Odoch & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 0036 of 2016) [2018] UGHCLD 72 (6 December 2018)
The High Court dismissed a land appeal, upholding the respondents’ customary title and finding no fatal error in the trial court’s failure to visit the locus in quo.
Butia v Drate & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 0012 of 2008) [2016] UGHCLD 62 (1 December 2016)
The trial magistrate erred by relying on observations from a second, unrecorded locus visit conducted without notice to the appellant, which is a procedural defect. However, this defect did not occasion a miscarriage of justice because the case could be decided on the available evidence, and a retrial would prejudice the parties due to the age and likely unavailability of key witnesses. The evidence established that the boundary between the parties was fixed by the Sub-county Chief in 1974, marked by Woro trees, and this boundary should be respected. The appellant failed to prove that the res…
Source excerpt
