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
Makondere v Kyenjojo District Local Government (HCT-01-CV-MA-0012-2025) [2025] UGHC 275 (25 April 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for a temporary mandatory injunction seeking reinstatement as Town Clerk/Principal Township Officer pending a related civil suit.
Welmond Plastics Limited & 2 Others v Sathick & Another (Miscellaneous Application 2844 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 66 (27 February 2024)
The High Court of Uganda dismissed a contempt application, finding the respondents knew of the order but had not intentionally disobeyed it because compliance was hindered by withheld company information.
Ask Without Shame Limited v Nabembezi (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 153 of 2020) [2021] UGHCCD 32 (21 May 2021)
The High Court refused an interlocutory mandatory injunction requiring the respondent to deposit withdrawn company funds, holding it would effectively grant the main claim.
Mitanda v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 1424 of 2017) [2018] UGCommC 40 (2 May 2018)
The High Court dismissed a bid for a temporary injunction over detained goods, holding that the order would not preserve the status quo and that the pleaded relief was unsupported.
Xing Wang Company Limited v Zheng Zuping (MISCELLANEOUS COMPANY CAUSE No. 0001 OF 2018) [2018] UGHCCD 31 (29 May 2018)
The applicant failed to specify the legal basis for the application and did not provide evidence of ownership or licensing to operate the disputed slot machines. The respondent demonstrated prima facie evidence that Wangula (U) Limited is the licensed operator and in possession of the machines. The court found that granting a mandatory injunction would risk prejudging the substantive dispute and cause irremediable harm to the respondent, whose business would be disrupted without adequate remedy in damages. The balance of convenience and justice favored the respondent, as the applicant had not…
Source excerpt
