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, 03:43 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

8 Nov 2024

Commercial And Corporate [2024] UGIAT 7

Fireworks Advertising Uganda Limited v CIC General Insurance Uganda Limited (Application No. 07 of 2024)

Fireworks Advertising Uganda Limited v CIC General Insurance Uganda Limited (Application No. 07 of 2024) [2024] UGIAT 7 (8 November 2024)

Court: Insurance Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)
Case number: Application No. 07 of 2024
Judges: Nangono Namakiika, chairperson, Okotha, Panel Member, Luwaga - Panel Member, Mayanja, Nabasirye - Panel Member

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's claim satisfied the policy's requirements for theft, as police reports and witness testimony established forcible entry and visible damage (broken latch). The Respondent's evidence was unreliable, with expert testimony lacking proper qualifications and photographic evidence deemed hearsay. The Tribunal held that the relocation of premises was a material fact, but the Applicant notified the Respondent within a reasonable time (six days), and the policy did not specify a strict notification timeframe. The Respondent's issuance of an endorsement without al…

Source excerpt

Insurance Contracts
Material Non Disclosure
Policy Interpretation
Burden Of Proof
Indemnity Claims

Read case analysis

28 Jan 2013

Commercial And Corporate [2013] UGCommC 14

Mawadri v Brit Syndicates & Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS 376 of 2009)

Mawadri v Brit Syndicates & Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS 376 of 2009) [2013] UGCommC 14 (28 January 2013)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: HCT-00-CC-CS 376 of 2009

The court found that the insurance policy issued to the plaintiff covered only event cancellation, not non-appearance of the artist, because the relevant section of the proposal form (Part B) was left blank and the necessary information for such cover was not provided. The broker (second defendant) had informed the plaintiff that more information was required for non-appearance cover, and the plaintiff, represented by counsel, failed to provide it. The underwriter (first defendant) was therefore justified in declining the claim. However, the broker breached its duty by failing to transmit the…