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
Housing Finance Bank v Kiganda Jalia (Miscellaneous Cause No. 12 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 516 (14 July 2025)
The High Court declined to grant vacant possession in a mortgage recovery application, finding disputed liability and insufficient proof of statutory notice service.
Ndawula v Tropical Bank Limited and Another (Misc Cause 332 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 397 (27 October 2023)
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirement under Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act, which requires that an application for a vesting order must first be made to the Commissioner Land Registration. The court found no evidence that the applicant had exhausted this avenue before seeking relief from the High Court. The court emphasized that adherence to statutory procedure is essential to prevent redundancy of the Commissioner Land Registration's office and to manage case backlog. The affidavits in reply were not stru…
Source excerpt
Housing finance Bank Ltd v Mayanja T/A Mat Hotel and Leisure Centre (Originating Summons No. 6 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 75 (30 August 2022)
The High Court granted a bank foreclosure, eviction, access, and sale orders over mortgaged property after the defendant defaulted and filed no defence.
Summer Fruits Uganda Limited and Another v Development Finance Corporation of Uganda and 2 Others (Civil Suit 1077 of 95) [1996] UGHC 52 (4 April 1996)
The High Court ordered the plaintiff companies to furnish Shs. 200 million security for costs within 30 days, or Civil Suit No. 1077 of 1995 would be struck out.
Karachiwalla v Nanji and Others (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1955) [1950] EACA 112 (1 January 1950)
The court held that the mortgage money had become payable due to the appellant's defaults under the mortgage deed, and there was no contractual provision that precluded the mortgagee from seeking an order for sale under section 67 of the Indian Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The relevant clauses in the mortgage deed, when read together, qualified but did not negate the right to enforce repayment and sale upon default. The court further found that the alleged compromise was not a concluded agreement, as the settlement was contingent upon execution of a fourth mortgage, which was never finaliz…
Source excerpt
