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
Nile Fibre v Baguma (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCD 86 (1 March 2022)
The High Court allowed an appeal, holding that Sarapio Tumusiime acted as an independent contractor, not an agent, so the appellant was not liable for the respondents' timber claim.
Ojok & 4 Others v Gulu Municipal Council & Another (Civil Suit No. 32 of 2006) [2019] UGHC 70 (27 November 2019)
The High Court held that local government bodies lacked power to appoint the plaintiffs to teaching posts, so the alleged employment contracts were ultra vires and unenforceable.
Habre International Uganda Limited v Dabo Kalilou (Civil Suit No. 739 of 2006) [2011] UGHCLD 2 (17 March 2011)
The court found that the defendant purchased the suit land from the plaintiff company through its director, Hussein Abdalla, who had ostensible authority to transact on behalf of the company. The change of company name did not affect the company's legal identity or its ability to transfer property. The transaction was not tainted with fraud, as the defendant acted in good faith and relied on the representations and actions of the company's authorised director. Any under-declaration of the purchase price was attributed to the lawyers, not the defendant, and there was no evidence of fraudulent…
Source excerpt
Were Fred v Kaga Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 530 of 2004) [2005] UGCommC 79 (23 December 2005)
The High Court found that Muyingo had ostensible authority to sell a company vehicle, holding Kaga Ltd bound by the sale and awarding damages and interest to the buyer.
Hardware Deals (U) Ltd v Alam Construction EA Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 658 of 2003) [2005] UGCommC 25 (30 May 2005)
The High Court Commercial Court dismissed a claim for payment for goods supplied, finding no proof that the alleged agent had ongoing authority to bind the defendant.
City African Textiles Shop (u) Ltd v Jan Mohamed Ltd (HCT-00-CV-MA-0437 OF 2002) (HCT-OO-CV-MA-0437 of 2002) [2002] UGHC 22 (14 October 2002)
The High Court set aside a consent order after finding the applicant company’s advocates lacked authority to compromise the suit, and that Hussein Abdalla was not authorized to bind the company.
International Credit Bank Ltd v Celtel Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 268 of 2002) [2002] UGCommC 30 (19 June 2002)
The court found that the service agreements were entered into by International Credit Bank Ltd, not by the individual directors, as evidenced by the manner of execution, the use of a commercial client form, a single customer number, and a single account. The alleged failure to comply with internal company execution requirements did not affect the validity of the agreements as far as third parties are concerned, due to the doctrine of ostensible authority. The applicant failed to raise any triable issue or defence against the respondent's claim. Consequently, leave to defend was denied and the…
Source excerpt
School Outfitters Uganda Limited v Bahange and Others (Civil Suit 750 of 1997) [1998] UGHC 25 (2 July 1998)
The court found that the Plaintiff's Managing Director, Mrs. Monica Erapu, was both Managing Director and Chairman and had been managing the company almost single-handedly, with the Board of Directors acquiescing in her conduct. There was no evidence of any express restriction on her powers, nor any board resolution limiting her authority to sell company property. The Articles of Association, as incorporated from Table A and modified, vested broad management powers in the Managing Director. The court held that the Plaintiff, by its conduct, held out Mrs. Erapu as having authority to enter int…
Source excerpt
Kenya Farmers Association Ltd v Abubakar (C.C. 12/1031 (Eldoret).) [1931] EACA 9 (1 January 1931)
The court found no evidence of a custom in the transport business permitting lorry drivers to order goods on behalf of their employers. There was no proof of actual or ostensible authority granted by the defendant to Yassin Farah to pledge his credit, nor evidence that the goods ordered by Farah came to the defendant's use. The court also held that the defendant's failure to dispute the accounts did not amount to ratification. Accordingly, the defendant was held liable only for the invoices personally signed by him, and not for those ordered by Yassin Farah.
Source excerpt
