Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 2 court collections
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 02:30 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

26 Jun 2025

Land And Property [2025] UGCA 210

Kiiza Luka and Others v Kitswamba Sub County Local Government and Kasese District Land Board

Kiiza Luka and Others v Kitswamba Sub County Local Government and Kasese District Land Board (Civil Appeal No. 94 of 2015) [2025] UGCA 210 (26 June 2025)

Court: Court of Appeal of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal No. 94 of 2015
Judge: Dr. F. Zeija, DCJ, Cheborion-Barishaki, JA, Esta Nambayo, JA/JCC

The Court of Appeal found that the appellants failed to disclose a cause of action in their plaint. The evidence showed that the suit land was public land held in trust by the District Land Board, and the appellants, as traders with lock-ups, did not have customary ownership rights over the land. The sub-county's resolution to sell the market plot had not been implemented, and the controlling authority responsible for the land had changed since the institution of the suit. The Court held that the trial Judge was justified in striking out the suit for disclosing no cause of action, as the appe…

Source excerpt

Cause Of Action
Customary Land Ownership
Judicial Review Vs Civil Suit
Public Land Trusteeship

Read case analysis

17 Jun 2020

Land And Property [2020] UGHC 60

Katongole aka Omukwenda Katongole v Kibaale District Council

Katongole aka Omukwenda Katongole v Kibaale District Council (Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2015) [2020] UGHC 60 (17 June 2020)

Court: High Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2015
Judge: Gadenya, J

The court found that the appellant had occupied and developed the suit land unchallenged from 1973 until 1994, exceeding the twelve-year requirement for bona fide occupancy under Section 29(2) of the Land Act and Article 237(8) of the Constitution. The respondent failed to prove valid ownership or produce credible evidence of title, and no registered owner or agent challenged the appellant's occupation during the relevant period. The trial magistrate erred by relying on the Land Reform Decree, which did not apply retrospectively to defeat the appellant's rights. The respondent's entry onto th…