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
Kulabako v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause No. 0206 of 2022) [2025] UGHCCD 92 (26 June 2025)
The High Court allowed judicial review, quashed the Commissioner Land Registration’s title-cancellation order, and held the decision ultra vires and procedurally unfair.
Dr. Shadat Ssemakula Mutyaba Mohmeded v Gulu University (Miscellaneous Application 48 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 1072 (25 November 2024)
The High Court at Gulu dismissed an application for stay, injunction, and prohibition, holding there was no executable order to stay and no basis to stop the university filling the Dean post.
Abbey Musinguzi t/a Abtex Prodctions & Another v Inspector General of Police & Another (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO. 147 OF 2019) [2020] UGHCCD 113 (13 May 2020)
The court found that the Inspector General of Police's decision to indefinitely stop the Applicants from organizing 'Kyarenga Extra Concerts' was ultra vires, illegal, irrational, and procedurally improper. The Applicants had complied with all police requirements for the concerts, and the subsequent directive to suspend the events was issued without valid reason or opportunity for the Applicants to be heard regarding alleged past misconduct. The powers relied upon by the police under Section 32(2) of the Police Act were declared unconstitutional and void by prior case law, and the concerts, b…
Source excerpt
Attorney General v Yustus Tinkasimiire and Others (Criminal Appeal No. 208 of 2013) [2018] UGCA 253 (21 May 2018)
The Court of Appeal upheld an order of prohibition against an eviction decision, holding that judicial review concerns fairness and legality, not ownership of the land.
Luwero Town Council v Attorney General (Misc. Cause No. 150 of 2013) [2013] UGHCCD 7 (21 January 2013)
The court found that the recommendations in the Inspectorate of Government's report did not amount to decisions that are reviewable by certiorari or prohibition. The report did not question or review the civil matter pending in court, nor did it contravene Section 19(1)(c) of the Inspectorate of Government Act. The disciplinary recommendations were administrative in nature and did not prejudice the pending suit or the applicant's defence. The court further held that the report is not binding on the trial court, and any party seeking to rely on it must have it evaluated by the court. The appli…
Source excerpt
