Uganda Case Law

Wuma and 2 Others v Uganda Railways Corporation

Wuma and 2 Others v Uganda Railways Corporation (Civil Suit 915 of 2017) [2023] UGHCLD 428 (13 October 2023)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit 915 of 2017

Judge

Keitirima, J

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a cause of action against the defendant. The evidence showed that the mandate to offer non-core properties to sitting tenants under the privatization policy rested with the Privatization Unit and the Divestiture Committee, not with Uganda Railways Corporation. The defendant had no legal obligation or capacity to offer the suit premises for sale to the plaintiffs. The court further held that the first plaintiff's claim was res judicata, having been determined in a previous suit. As the plaintiffs could not show any breach of a legal right…

Source excerpt

• Sitting Tenants
• Privatization Policy
• Public Enterprise Divestiture
• Cause Of Action
• Eviction Notices

Kamugabirwe v Attorney General

Kamugabirwe v Attorney General (Civil Suit 217 of 2018) [2023] UGHCCD 411 (3 July 2023)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Civil Suit 217 of 2018

Judge

Baguma, J

The High Court held that a retrenchment compensation suit filed 23 years after the cause of action arose was time-barred and rejected the plaint.

• Limitation Periods
• Rejection Of Plaint
• Retrenchment Compensation
• Public Enterprise Divestiture
• Limitation-periods
• Rejection-of-plaint

Katureeba & Anor Vs Uganda Revenue Authority

Katureeba & Anor Vs Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal No.55 of 2012) [2018] UGCA 77 (11 October 2018)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No.55 of 2012

The Court of Appeal, following the binding precedent of the Supreme Court in Uganda Revenue Authority v Siraje Hassan Kajura, held that terminal benefits paid to the appellants upon termination of employment by British American Tobacco (Uganda) Ltd, through the Privatisation Unit, constitute employment income under section 19(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court found that the appellants did not hold pensionable office under the Pensions Act, and the payments made were not pension or exempt lump sums from a resident retirement fund. The Privatisation Unit acted on behalf of the employer in the…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Terminal Benefits
• Income Tax Act Interpretation
• Exemption Of Pension
• Public Enterprise Divestiture
• Withholding Tax
• Employment Income Definition

Katureebe and Another v Uganda Revenue Authority

Katureebe and Another v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal No 55 of 2012) [2018] UGCA 247 (11 October 2018)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No 55 of 2012

Judge

Kakuru, JA, Kiryabwire, JA, Madrama, JA

The Court of Appeal held that terminal benefits paid to the appellants, former employees of British American Tobacco (Uganda) Ltd, were taxable as employment income under section 19 of the Income Tax Act. The court found that the payments did not qualify as pension or as a lump sum from a resident retirement fund, and the appellants were not public service officers holding pensionable office under the Pensions Act. The court followed the binding Supreme Court decision in Uganda Revenue Authority v Hassan Kajura, which established that terminal benefits are taxable. The payment by the Privatis…

Source excerpt

• Income Tax
• Employment Income
• Terminal Benefits
• Tax Exemptions
• Public Enterprise Divestiture

Geoffrey Oryem & 4 Ors v Apollo Hotel Corporation Ltd

Geoffrey Oryem & 4 Ors v Apollo Hotel Corporation Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2004) [2006] UGCA 18 (30 August 2006)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2004

The Court of Appeal held that Apollo Hotel Corporation Limited was the proper defendant in a wrongful dismissal claim concerning Apollo/Sheraton Hotel.

• Wrongful Dismissal
• Corporate Successorship
• Terminal Benefits
• Public Enterprise Divestiture
• Wrongful-dismissal
• Corporate-successorship

Peoples Transport Company Limited (In recievership) v Afric Co-operatives SOC limited

Peoples Transport Company Limited (In recievership) v Afric Co-operatives SOC limited (Civil Appeal 41 of 1997) [1999] UGCA 32 (4 March 1999)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 41 of 1997

Judge

Okello, JA, Mpagi-Bahigeine, JA, Engwau, JA

The Court of Appeal held that a company under statutory receivership for divestiture lacked capacity to sue in its own name. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

• Receivership
• Corporate Capacity
• Public Enterprise Divestiture
• Statutory Interpretation
• Corporate-capacity
• Statutory-interpretation