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
KTA Advocates v Colline House Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 2158 of 2023) [2025] UGCommC 124 (22 May 2025)
The High Court reviewed its earlier order on a mortgage-related security deposit, finding it should have directed payment to the person conducting the sale, not the court.
Landmark Junior School Limited v The Microfinance Support Centre Limited (Miscellaneous Appeal 5 of 2023) [2024] UGCommC 356 (18 October 2024)
The High Court partly allowed an appeal against a registrar’s conditional injunction order, holding that the 30% mortgage deposit should be based on the outstanding amount, not the forced sale value.
Bunjo v Bank of Africa Uganda Limited & 3 Others (Constitutional Petition 23 of 2018) [2024] UGCC 19 (23 May 2024)
The Constitutional Court held that Regulation 13 of the Mortgage Regulations S.I No. 2 of 2012 does not contravene Articles 44(c), 26(1), 31(1), or 139(1) of the Constitution. The requirement to deposit 30% of the forced sale value or outstanding loan arises only at the stage when a party seeks to stop or adjourn a sale of mortgaged property, not as a precondition to accessing court. The regulation is intended to balance the rights of mortgagees and mortgagors, prevent abuse of interlocutory relief, and is subject to court discretion, especially regarding spouses. The court found that propert…
Source excerpt
Haruna v Attorney General & Another (Constitutional Petition 18 of 2020) [2024] UGCC 17 (22 May 2024)
The court held that the issues raised in the petition regarding the constitutionality of Regulation 13 of the Mortgage Regulations 2012 had already been conclusively determined by the Constitutional Court in Ferdsult Engineering Services & Mugisha Ferdinand v Attorney General & ABSA Bank Limited. The court found that Regulation 13 does not contravene or is not inconsistent with the cited constitutional provisions, including the right to property, equality before the law, fair hearing, and judicial independence. The requirement for a security deposit is designed to prevent frivolous litigation…
Source excerpt
Namumbya v Equity Bank Uganda Limited & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 743 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 189 (20 October 2023)
The court found that while the applicant is prima facie the spouse of the mortgagor, she failed to provide compelling corroborative evidence of her inability to pay the security deposit. The Assistant Registrar was therefore not in error in conditioning the temporary injunction on payment of security. However, given the unique circumstances—specifically, the evolving status of the property from non-matrimonial to matrimonial after the mortgage was created, and the lack of clarity in the law regarding such situations—the court held that the 30% security deposit was excessive. The court exercis…
Source excerpt
ONETI VS COMMISSIONER LAND REGISTRATION AND ORS (Misc Cause No. 255 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 34 (6 April 2022)
The court found that while the applicant is an aggrieved person entitled to seek review, the alleged error in the Registrar's order was not an error apparent on the face of the record but rather a possible erroneous decision requiring detailed reasoning, which is a ground for appeal, not review. However, the court held that the Registrar misapplied Regulation 13 of the Mortgage Regulations, as there was no sale or default to justify the imposition of a 30% security deposit. The applicant was not a party to the mortgage, nor was he seeking to adjourn or stop a sale, but rather to protect his p…
Source excerpt
Nakato v Housing Finance Bank Limited and Another (Civil Appeal 687 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 130 (5 April 2022)
The Registrar's imposition of the 30% deposit condition was a proper exercise of discretion under Regulation 13 of The Mortgage Regulations, 2012. The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence of undue hardship or inability to pay, relying instead on general assertions of illiteracy, family size, and lack of alternative accommodation. The court found no specific error in law or fact, nor any manifest injustice in the Registrar's decision. The statutory requirements for mortgages override traditional considerations for temporary injunctions, and the discretion to waive the deposit must b…
Source excerpt
Kingston Enterprises Limited and 3 Others v Standard Chartered Bank (U) Limited (Civil Appeal 446 of 2021) [2021] UGCommC 158 (23 April 2021)
The High Court held that Regulation 13(1) of the Mortgage Regulations requires a 30% deposit for injunctions stopping sale of mortgaged property, except where the applicant is a mortgagor’s spouse.
Orient Bank Limited v Sentogo (Miscellaneous Application No. 1112 of 2019) [2020] UGCommC 149 (28 September 2020)
The High Court found that Civil Application No. 016 of 2019 at the Court of Appeal, which sought to strike out Civil Appeal No. 320 of 2018, is now moot because both Civil Appeal No. 320/2018 and Civil Application No. 129/2020 have been withdrawn and dismissed. However, the Court held that since Constitutional Petition No. 18 of 2020 challenges the constitutionality of Regulation 13(1) of the Mortgage Regulation—the very regulation at issue in MA 1112 of 2019—the proceedings in MA 1112 of 2019 must be stayed pending the outcome of the constitutional petition, in accordance with binding preced…
Source excerpt
Mutumba v Crane Bank Limited (Misc. Application No. 1536 of 2017) [2018] UGHCLD 21 (12 February 2018)
The court found that the applicant established a prima facie case and demonstrated that she would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction was not granted, as the property in question is her matrimonial home and she did not consent to subsequent mortgages. However, the court held that, in accordance with Regulation 13(1) of the Mortgage Regulations 2012 and the binding Court of Appeal decision in Ganafa Peter Kisawuzi v DFCU Bank Ltd, an injunction to restrain a mortgage sale cannot be granted unless the applicant deposits 30% of the forced sale value or outstanding amount. The court there…
Source excerpt
