Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 2 court collections
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 04:35 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

2 Mar 2001

Civil Procedure [2001] UGCA 21

Kapeeka Coffee Works Limited and Another v Non -Performing Assets Recovery Trust

Kapeeka Coffee Works Limited and Another v Non -Performing Assets Recovery Trust (Civil Appeal 53 of 2000) [2001] UGCA 21 (2 March 2001)

Court: Court of Appeal of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal 53 of 2000
Judge: Okello, JA, Mpagi-Bahigeine, JA, Engwau, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent's amended plaint failed to comply with regulation 4(b) of S.I. No. 76/95, which mandates that notice of assignment in favour of the Trust must be forwarded by the bank to the debtor in the prescribed form. The plaint only pleaded notice of intention to sue, not notice of assignment, and did not demonstrate compliance with the statutory requirement. This omission is fatal, as it constitutes non-compliance with a mandatory provision of law, thereby rendering the plaint defective and disclosing no cause of action against the appellants. The appeal was…

Source excerpt

Cause Of Action
Assignment Of Debt
Mandatory Statutory Compliance
Notice Requirements
Non Performing Assets
Pleading Defects

Read case analysis

1 Jan 1955

Family And Children [1955] EACA 298

Newell v Newell

Newell v Newell (Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1955) [1955] EACA 298 (1 January 1955)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1955
Judge: Bourke J, Nihill P, Worley VP

The Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the petition for dissolution of marriage because the petition failed to plead and prove the petitioner's domicile in Kenya, a statutory prerequisite for jurisdiction under the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance. The omission was not merely procedural but fundamental, rendering the entire proceedings and decree a nullity. The appellate court declined to allow amendment of the petition or to remit the issue for determination, as such steps would improperly validate proceedings that were coram non judice and would introduce factual complications not r…