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: 18 Sep 2026, 03:41 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

12 Sept 2017

Civil Procedure [2017] UGCommC 105

MK Creditor v Owora

MK Creditor v Owora (Miscellaneous Application No. 143 of 2015) [2017] UGCommC 105 (12 September 2017)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Miscellaneous Application No. 143 of 2015

The court found that none of the alleged errors raised by the applicant constituted errors apparent on the face of the record. The reference to the Money Lenders Act was clear from the document itself and did not require extraneous explanation. Disagreement with the court's interpretation of forfeiture provisions or unconscionable interest did not amount to manifest errors but were matters open to interpretation or argument. The court emphasized that review is not a substitute for appeal and should only be granted where a clear, self-evident error exists. Since the applicant's complaints requ…

Source excerpt

Review Of Judgment
Error On Face Of Record
Money Lenders Act
Summary Procedure
Preliminary Objection
Unconscionable Interest

Read case analysis

5 Nov 2001

Commercial And Corporate [2001] UGHCCD 1

Kitande v Nyende (HCCA No. 27 of 2000)

Kitande v Nyende (HCCA No. 27 of 2000) [2001] UGHCCD 1 (5 November 2001)

Court: HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Case number: HCCA No. 27 of 2000
Judge: Rugadya, J

The appellate court found that the appellant was not a money lender within the meaning of the Money Lenders Act, as there was no evidence she conducted a business of money lending or held herself out as such. Therefore, the transaction was not illegal, and the appellant was entitled to recover both the principal and the agreed interest. However, the clause stipulating a penalty interest of shs. 5,000 per day for default was held to be extravagant, harsh, and unconscionable, amounting to a penalty and thus irrecoverable. The court awarded the principal sum, the agreed interest, and minimal dam…