Uganda Case Law

Masawali and 7 Others v Uganda Wild Life Authority and Another

Masawali and 7 Others v Uganda Wild Life Authority and Another (Civil Suit 2 of 2013) [2024] UGHC 608 (19 June 2024)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Suit 2 of 2013

Judge

Apiny, J

The court found that while order 1 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules is couched in mandatory terms regarding the advertisement of the representative order and list of plaintiffs, the confusion in this case arose from the wording of the court's own order, which directed publication of the summons to file defence rather than the representative order. The plaintiffs, being laypersons, relied on their counsel and should not be penalized for counsel's mistake. The court emphasized that the duty to ensure proper notice is ultimately on the court, and that substantive justice should prevail over t…

Source excerpt

• Representative Suits
• Order 1 Rule 8 Compliance
• Advertisement Of Orders
• Mistake Of Counsel
• Land Occupancy Rights

Kiiza and Others v Uganda Wildlife Authority and Another (HCT-01-CV-CS 39 of 2010)

Kiiza and Others v Uganda Wildlife Authority and Another (HCT-01-CV-CS 39 of 2010) [2023] UGHCCD 105 (17 April 2023)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

HCT-01-CV-CS 39 of 2010

Judge

Wagona, J

The High Court overruled preliminary objections on representative-suit notice and limitation, ordering the plaintiffs to re-advertise the representative order and list of persons represented.

• Representative Suits
• Order 1 Rule 8 Compliance
• Limitation Periods
• Eviction And Compensation
• Representative-suits
• Order-1-rule-8

Shoprite Checkers (U) Limited v Nyende (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2021)

Shoprite Checkers (U) Limited v Nyende (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2021) [2021] UGIC 55 (19 November 2021)

Court

Industrial Court of Uganda

Case number

Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2021

Judge

Namara, Panel Member, Nabirye, Panel Member, Matovu, Panel Member, Ruhinda-Ntengye, J

The Industrial Court held that the labour claim was not fatally defective and could be amended to include the 44 claimants, dismissing the application to strike it out.

• Representative Suits
• Order 1 Rule 8 Compliance
• Labour Dispute Procedure
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Representative-suits
• Order-1-rule-8