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: 1 court collection
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 04:48 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

1 Jan 1955

Family And Children [1955] EACA 362

Kakar v Kumari (Divorce Cause No. 16 of 1942)

Kakar v Kumari (Divorce Cause No. 16 of 1942) [1955] EACA 362 (1 January 1955)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: Divorce Cause No. 16 of 1942
Judge: Lucie-Smith, J. (Kenya)

The court determined that the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance, by its definition of marriage, applies only to monogamous unions. Since Hindu marriages are not monogamous, the Ordinance does not extend to them. Furthermore, Article 4(1) of the Kenya Order in Council does not confer jurisdiction to the court to grant restitution of conjugal rights in respect of polygamous Hindu marriages. The court relied on authoritative texts and previous case law to confirm that the relief sought is unavailable under the current legal framework. The petition was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Source excerpt

Restitution Of Conjugal Rights
Hindu Marriage
Jurisdiction
Polygamous Marriage

Read case analysis

1 Jan 1955

Criminal Law [1955] EACA 357

Mawji and Another v Reginam

Mawji and Another v Reginam (Criminal Appeals Nos. 169 and 170 of 1955) [1955] EACA 357 (1 January 1955)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: Criminal Appeals Nos. 169 and 170 of 1955
Judge: Lowe, J. (Tanganyika), Nihill P, Worley VP

The court held that the doctrine of legal unity of spouses under English common law applies only to monogamous marriages. Since the appellants' marriage, under the Ismailia Khoja sect, was polygamous in nature, the fiction that husband and wife are one person does not apply. Therefore, the appellants could be charged and convicted of conspiracy under section 110 of the Penal Code. Regarding the retention of stolen property, the court found that the presumption of possession in the matrimonial home generally favors the husband, but where the wife does not act independently, she cannot be convi…