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
Mwebaze v Basemera (HCT-01-FD-MC-0020-2024) [2025] UGHC 439 (30 May 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application over estate subdivision, holding it was brought by the wrong procedure and before mandatory arbitration between co-administrators.
Faustine Ntambara v Benon Sebujisho (Civil Appeal No. 08 of 2021) [2025] UGSC 19 (14 May 2025)
The Supreme Court held that civil revision decisions of the High Court under section 83 of the Civil Procedure Act are final and not appealable to the Court of Appeal.
Pancras John Mukasa Sebuwufu v Kamoga Muhammad (Miscellaneous Application No. 0001 of 2025) [2025] UGHCLD 60 (18 April 2025)
The court held that the applicant's challenge to the Registrar's dismissal order was procedurally improper. The Civil Procedure Rules explicitly provide that any person aggrieved by a Registrar's order must appeal to a judge of the High Court under Order 50 rule 8. The applicant, instead of appealing, sought review and setting aside of the order, invoking Section 82 and 98 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court found that the existence of a specific appellate procedure precludes the use of review or inherent powers except in exceptional circumstances, which were not demonstrated. The applicant…
Source excerpt
Ssekyansanku & 12 Others v Aronda (Miscellaneous Application 196 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 146 (4 April 2025)
The court found that the 1st to 7th applicants, though not parties to Miscellaneous Application No. 18 of 2022, were aggrieved by the consent temporary injunction order as it affected their interests and resulted in their eviction from the suit land. The 8th to 14th applicants also challenged the consent order, arguing that it was entered without their personal endorsement and without proper procedure. The court held that while an advocate may act on behalf of a party, the practice and fairness require that parties personally endorse consent orders, especially where substantial rights are aff…
Source excerpt
Pegasus Technologies Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority and Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application No. 29 of 2023) [2025] UGCommC 167 (3 April 2025)
The court held that the applicant's application for discovery and production of tax returns and immigration records succeeds. The respondents, though non-parties to the main suit, are proper custodians of the documents sought and may be joined for discovery purposes. The application, though brought by notice of motion instead of chamber summons, is not fatally defective as the court has jurisdiction and no prejudice is caused. The documents sought are relevant and material to the resolution of the main suit, as they may confirm or impeach the defense that payments were genuine and made by for…
Source excerpt
Nabirye v Basoga (Miscellaneous Application 133 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 125 (21 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to review an ex parte appeal judgment, holding that reinstatement and rehearing, not review, was the proper procedure.
Khainza & 4 Others v Mweru (Miscellaneous Application 437 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 122 (19 March 2025)
The High Court at Mbale dismissed an application challenging a Registrar’s order, holding that the proper remedy was an appeal under Order 50 rule 8.
Pontrilas Investments Limited v Central Bank of Kenya and Another (Appeal No.2 of 2023) [2025] EACJ 9 (4 March 2025) (Appellate Division)
The Appellate Division set aside a bifurcation ruling, holding that jurisdictional issues already found to involve mixed law and fact had to be heard with evidence.
Bachubhai Karsandas Thobani v Mugume and 2 Others (Civil Suit 615 of 2017) [2025] UGHCLD 41 (28 February 2025)
The High Court held that the plaintiff’s lease remained protected by expropriation-related rules, so the land was not available for reallocation and the 1st defendant’s title was cancelled.
Kayina v Uganda Medical & Dental Practitioner's Council (Miscellaneous Cause 163 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 15 (14 February 2025)
The court found that the respondent failed to comply with statutory requirements for serving notice of inquiry to the applicant, as the summons were not personally addressed or served to him, and did not meet the 21-day notice period mandated by law. The applicant was not made aware that he was the subject of the proceedings and was thus deprived of the opportunity to prepare a defense or engage legal representation. This amounted to a breach of the principles of fair hearing and natural justice as enshrined in the Constitution and the Uganda Medical and Dental Practitioners Act. The procedur…
Source excerpt
