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
Ziruntusa v Mbabazi and 3 Others (Civil Suit 352 of 2020) [2024] UGHCCD 158 (11 October 2024)
The High Court dismissed a claim for recovery of money allegedly sent for investments, finding no proven trust or enforceable oral contract and treating the relationship as romantic.
Norwegian Refugee Council v Bomak Traders Limited (Civil Suit 12 of 2019) [2024] UGHC 977 (4 October 2024)
The High Court of Uganda at Arua held that Bomak Traders Limited must refund UGX 89,503,075 after an erroneous double payment, with interest and costs.
Assa Abloy (U) Ltd v John Mboizi (Miscellaneous Application No. 784 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 32 (2 June 2022)
The court found that the amendment sought by the Applicant does not introduce a new cause of action but merely alters the sum claimed and provides particulars supporting the claim. Since the hearing has not commenced and evidence has not been adduced, the Respondent will not suffer prejudice that cannot be compensated by costs. The principles from Eastern Bakery v Castelino and Order 6 Rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules support granting leave to amend pleadings to determine the real questions in controversy. The Applicant is therefore granted leave to amend the plaint, and the Respondent ma…
Source excerpt
Dr. Amumpe v Muhangi (Civil Appeal No. 62 of 2019) [2021] UGHCCD 21 (30 March 2021)
High Court civil appeal partly allowed in a money recovery dispute: the respondent was ordered to refund UGX 9,000,000, but a further UGX 20,100,000 claim was not proved.
Edward Kakuba v Kamukama Steven and Anor (HCT-00-CC-MC 16 of 2007) [2007] UGCommC 80 (17 October 2007)
The High Court dismissed an application to transfer money from a bank account, holding that recovery of money must be brought by plaint, not notice of motion.
Patel v Mbabaali and Another (Civil Appeal No. 63 of 2002) [2005] UGCA 93 (11 January 2005)
The Court of Appeal held that Patel’s plaint disclosed a cause of action and that he had locus standi to seek refund of USD 6,500 paid personally to the respondents.
Afro Print Limited v Lwanga (Civil Suit 471 of 1997) [1999] UGHC 36 (22 September 1999)
The High Court found the company owed the defendant only Shs.13 million, not Shs.36 million. It awarded the plaintiff the excess, damages, interest, and costs.
Gangji v Pavetto (Civ. App. No. 19/1935.) [1936] EACA 19 (1 January 1936)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that a banker was not bound to credit a customer for money paid into the wrong account where the banker made no relevant mistake.
