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
Baguma Julius & 4 Others v Butunduzi Town council & 3 Others (Miscellaneous Application 24 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 113 (25 March 2024)
The High Court granted extension of time but dismissed a judicial review application over a land conversion dispute, holding the matter was not amenable to judicial review.
Walugembe v Kampala Capital City Authority (Miscellaneous Cause 344 of 2021) [2023] UGHCCD 421 (17 January 2023)
The respondent's refusal to process the applicant's development permit solely on the basis of a pending, unprosecuted appeal was unreasonable, irrational, and a violation of the principles of natural justice. The law is clear that an appeal does not operate as a stay of execution unless a competent court orders otherwise. The applicant's equitable interest in the land is supported by a valid court decree, which has not been overturned or stayed. The respondent, as a public body, is duty bound to consider and determine applications on their merits and cannot arbitrarily deny rights recognized…
Source excerpt
A. Dean & Company Ltd v Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) (Civil Appeal No. 153 of 2015) [2023] UGCA 5 (3 January 2023)
The Court of Appeal held that the leaseholder was entitled to a fair hearing before the authority decided not to renew the lease and allowed the appeal.
Touch Media Limited T/A Touch FM Limited v Uganda Communications Commission (Miscellaneous Cause No. 13 of 2021) [2022] UGHCCD 44 (11 March 2022)
The High Court dismissed judicial review over a radio licence transfer dispute, holding that parallel proceedings in the commercial court made the application improper.
Philadelphia Trade & Industry Limited v Kampala Capital City Authority (Civil Revision No. 15 of 2012) [2013] UGHC 271 (25 February 2013)
The court found that the respondent's decision to nullify the applicant's sublease, refuse extension, and re-enter the property was illegal, irrational, and procedurally improper. The respondent failed to provide the applicant an opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice and constitutional rights. The respondent did not adduce evidence of any investigation report or disposal flaws, and its predecessor (Kampala City Council) had lawfully granted the sublease, with the applicant fulfilling all obligations. The time limit for judicial review was interpreted as directory, n…
Source excerpt
