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
Bank of India (U) Limited v NC Beverages Limited and Another (Civil Suit No. 9 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 33 (21 March 2022)
The High Court held that URA’s distress and sale were void after liquidation commenced, and upheld the bank’s right as secured creditor to foreclose and take possession.
Bank of India (U) Limited v NC Beverages Limited and Another (Civil Suit Originating Summons 9 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 123 (21 March 2022)
The court held that the dispute was not a tax dispute within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tax Appeals Tribunal, as it did not concern a challenge to a tax assessment or decision under a taxing Act, but rather the priority of a secured creditor's rights over those of the tax authority in insolvency. The plaintiff's floating charge crystallised upon the filing of the winding up petition, giving the plaintiff a proprietary interest in the charged assets. The URA's distress and sale of the assets after the commencement of liquidation proceedings were illegal and void under section 97(1)(c) o…
Source excerpt
Ndugga v Kabito and Anor (Receivers of Spencon Services Limited in Receivership) (Miscellaneous Cause No. 219 of 2020) [2021] UGHCCD 3 (4 February 2021)
The court held that the Insolvency Act, 2011 prescribes a mandatory order of priority for payment of creditors in insolvency, with secured and preferential creditors to be satisfied before any payment to unsecured creditors. The applicant, being an unsecured creditor, cannot be paid ahead of secured creditors regardless of his personal circumstances. The court emphasized that while Article 126(2) of the Constitution calls for substantive justice, it is expressly subject to the law, and the statutory scheme cannot be circumvented by judicial discretion. The court found that the application sou…
Source excerpt
Wahid and Sons v Scammell and Others (CC. 373A/31.) [1932] EACA 43 (1 January 1932)
The court held that a debt which has accrued due, even if payment is postponed, is attachable before judgment, following the principle established in Webb v. Stanton. The assignments relied upon by the objectors only took effect from the date of registration, which occurred after the attachment. As the provisions of the Chattels Transfer Ordinance were not complied with, the assignments were void against the attaching creditors. The objectors failed to establish a valid interest in the property at the date of attachment, and thus their claim was disallowed.
Source excerpt
Hirjee and Sons v Damji and Another (C.C. 320/1929) [1929] EACA 68 (1 January 1929)
The court held that, under Section 46 of the Civil Procedure Ordinance, when property is attached in execution of decrees from more than one court, the court of highest grade is responsible for receiving and realizing the property and must consider the claims of all attaching creditors, regardless of whether their decrees are from that court or a subordinate court. Section 50 applies to rateable distribution among decree holders who have applied for execution before the receipt of assets. The court rejected the view that only creditors who have transferred their decrees to the Supreme Court m…
Source excerpt
