Uganda Case Law

Nalubowa v Nasazi

Nalubowa v Nasazi (Miscellaneous Application 162 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 288 (9 April 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 162 of 2024

Judge

Karemani Jamson K, J

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the memorandum of appeal was primarily due to the delay in obtaining a certified copy of the record of proceedings from the lower court, a factor outside her control. The court applied the principle that the time for lodging an appeal does not begin to run until the appellant receives the necessary proceedings. The memorandum of appeal was filed promptly after the record was available, rendering the application for leave to appeal out of time unnecessary. The court further exercised its inherent powers to validate service of the application…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Leave To Appeal Out Of Time
• Land Dispute
• Validation Of Appeal
• Procedural Delay

Nganyi and Others v Tanzania (Judgment - Reparations) (Application No. 006/2013)

Nganyi and Others v Tanzania (Judgment - Reparations) (Application No. 006/2013) [2019] AfCHPR 24 (4 July 2019)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 006/2013

Judge

Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Tchikaya J

The Court found that the Respondent State violated the Applicants’ rights to be tried within a reasonable time and to legal aid, but the violations did not fundamentally affect the outcome of the domestic proceedings for those convicted. Material damages were denied where insufficient evidence was provided, but limited compensation was awarded for proven medical expenses and legal fees. Moral damages were granted to both direct and indirect victims, with quantum determined by equity and proportionality, not by the standards of the Konaté case. The Court denied release of convicted Applicants…

Source excerpt

• Fair Trial Rights
• Legal Aid Entitlement
• Compensation For Unlawful Detention
• Reparations Quantification
• State Responsibility
• Procedural Delay

Kayiga Vs Mutyaba & 4 Ors

Kayiga Vs Mutyaba & 4 Ors (MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 333 OF 2018.) [2019] UGHCCD 286 (21 May 2019)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 333 OF 2018.

Judge

Luswata, J

The High Court granted an extension of time to appeal, finding the applicant had shown sufficient cause after delays in obtaining proceedings and possible advocate error.

• Extension Of Time
• Appeals
• Sufficient Cause
• Procedural Delay
• Extension-of-time
• Civil-appeals

Nsubuga & 3 Others v Kamuje

Nsubuga & 3 Others v Kamuje (Civil Application 31 of 1997) [1999] UGSC 38 (7 October 1999)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 31 of 1997

Judge

Oder, JSC

The Supreme Court of Uganda granted leave to appeal out of time, finding the delay was mainly due to former counsel’s procedural mistakes and not the applicants’ own dilatoriness.

• Extension Of Time
• Appeal Lodgment
• Procedural Delay
• Sufficient Cause
• Counsel Negligence
• Extension-of-time

Prof. G. S. Z Ssenyonga and Another v Uganda

Prof. G. S. Z Ssenyonga and Another v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application 10 of 1999) [1999] UGCA 53 (28 July 1999)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 10 of 1999

Judge

Okello, JA

The Court of Appeal of Uganda granted an extension of time to seek a certificate to appeal, holding that delay caused by counsel’s mistake was sufficient reason.

• Extension Of Time
• Certificate To Appeal
• Advocate Fault
• Procedural Delay
• Extension-of-time
• Certificate-to-appeal

Boney M. Katatumba v Waheed Karim

Boney M. Katatumba v Waheed Karim (Civil Application 27 of 2007) [2008] UGSC 3 (12 March 2008)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 27 of 2007

Judge

Mulenga, JSC

The court found that the delay in instituting the appeal was inordinate and not sufficiently explained by the applicant. Although the applicant's former advocates were partly to blame, the applicant himself contributed to the delay and failed to demonstrate that refusal of extension would result in manifest injustice. The court clarified that the suspension of time for lodging an appeal applies only to the period certified by the registrar for preparation and delivery of the record, not to the time when the advocate receives notice or collects the record. The applicant did not identify any no…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Appeal Lodgment
• Mistake Of Counsel
• Court Discretion
• Procedural Delay