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
JAS Ventures International Limited v Atuhaire (Civil Suit 676 of 2021) [2025] UGCommC 29 (18 March 2025)
The High Court of Uganda held that a money lending agreement was lawful, but reduced a 17.5% monthly interest rate as usurious and unconscionable.
Ndyowayesu v Serubiri (Civil Appeal 15 of 2021) [2024] UGHCCD 207 (19 December 2024)
The High Court upheld liability on dishonoured cheques but reduced interest from 22% to 15% per annum in a civil appeal over a UGX 16.5 million claim.
Image Finance Limited v Kamanyire (Civil Suit 1006 of 2019) [2024] UGCommC 119 (15 March 2024)
The court found that the transaction between the parties in May 2013 was not a genuine sale of land but a money lending transaction disguised as a sale. The Defendant was induced to sign a sale agreement and transfer forms under the misrepresentation that these documents were merely security for the loan, to be cancelled and the title returned upon repayment. Evidence, including informal receipts for interest payments after the purported sale, supported the Defendant's version. The Plaintiff failed to prove payment of the alleged purchase price or return of the title after the first loan. The…
Source excerpt
Ndahura v Twine (Miscellaneous Application 2 of 2023) [2023] UGHCCD 325 (18 August 2023)
The High Court at Hoima dismissed an application for unconditional leave to defend a summary suit, finding no triable issue and entering judgment for the respondent.
Ndyareeba v Arinaitwe (Miscellaneous Application No. 173 of 2019) [2022] UGCommC 2 (5 January 2022)
The court found that the applicant failed to raise any bona fide triable issue of fact or law that would justify granting leave to appear and defend the summary suit. The applicant did not unequivocally deny receiving the money or making part payment, and his defences were based on technicalities without sufficient factual disclosure. The argument that the respondent lacked legal authority to lend was dismissed as the transaction was a private arrangement, not a business of money lending. The claim of coercion in signing the memorandum of understanding was unsupported by particulars or eviden…
Source excerpt
Rajnishjain (Administor of the Estate of the late R.L Jain) v Lokii peter Abraham (Civil Suit No. 277 of 2013) [2021] UGCommC 48 (14 July 2021)
The High Court found the defendant indebted on a loan claim, held the 10% monthly interest unconscionable, substituted 2% monthly interest, and awarded damages and costs.
Arinaitwe v Africana Clays Limited (Civil Suit No 376 of 2013) [2017] UGCommC 252 (22 August 2017)
Commercial dispute over a UGX 220 million loan, admitted by the defendant’s directors. The court awarded the plaintiff the debt, subject to execution offsets and interest.
Balintuma v Dr. Handel Leslie (CIVIL SUIT No. 193 OF 2013) [2017] UGHCCD 58 (15 February 2017)
The High Court held that the plaintiff was holding out as a money lender, so the claim was time-barred under the Money Lenders Act and dismissed the suit with costs.
Hamwe Investiments Ltd v Babigumira (Civil Suit No. 24 of 2012) [2015] UGCommC 48 (18 February 2015)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the specific indebtedness of the defendant in the sum claimed due to a lack of clear records and contradictory evidence regarding the transactions. The interest rates stipulated in the loan agreement (1% per month for five months and 5% per month thereafter) were found to be excessive and unconscionable under Section 12 of the Money Lenders Act, which caps interest at 24% per annum. The plaintiff's failure to keep proper books of account as required by law further undermined its claim. The court held that, in s…
Source excerpt
MK Creditors v Owora Patrick (Civil Suit No. 533 of 2013) [2015] UGCommC 20 (29 January 2015)
The High Court dismissed a credit suit after finding the loan agreement illegal for excessive interest and for a kibanja transfer clause contrary to land law.
