Uganda Case Law

Atuhwere v Uganda

Atuhwere v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 2015) [2015] UGHCCRD 56 (4 September 2015)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 2015

Judge

Murangira, J

The appellate court found that the Trial Magistrate properly evaluated both direct and circumstantial evidence, including the complainant's testimony, identity card, sale agreement, and the appellant's own admissions. The appellant's photograph on the identity card and passport, his admission of partial payment, and the corroborating evidence from the Registrar of Titles and the real land owner established fraudulent intent and false pretence. Procedural complaints regarding final addresses and calling additional witnesses were dismissed as neither mandatory nor prejudicial, with no miscarria…

Source excerpt

• Obtaining Money By False Pretences
• Fraudulent Land Transfer
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Right To Call Witnesses
• Procedural Fairness

Rex v Luwanya and Another (Cr. Apps. Nos. 75 & 76 of 1938.)

Rex v Luwanya and Another (Cr. Apps. Nos. 75 & 76 of 1938.) [1938] EACA 122 (1 January 1938)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Cr. Apps. Nos. 75 & 76 of 1938.

Judge

Knight-Bruce, AG.C.J. (Tanganyika), Sheridan, (C.J. Kenya), Whitley CJ

The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa dismissed murder conviction appeals, refused a retrial for an absent defence witness, and excluded deceased-fear statements as inadmissible hearsay.

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Hearsay Exceptions
• Right To Call Witnesses
• Murder Conviction
• Retrial Standard
• Criminal-evidence

Rex v Banha and Others (Cr. Conf. Case No. 57/35.)

Rex v Banha and Others (Cr. Conf. Case No. 57/35.) [1935] EACA 137 (1 January 1935)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Cr. Conf. Case No. 57/35.

Judge

Gamble. Ag. J. (Kenya), Sheridan CJ

The court held that the conviction of the second accused could not stand because the magistrate improperly relied on inculpatory statements made by the accused during plea, despite a plea of not guilty being entered, contrary to established legal principle. Additionally, the second accused was denied the opportunity to call a witness to support his alibi, which was a fundamental procedural right. The court found that the available admissible evidence against the second accused was insufficient to warrant a retrial, especially considering the nature and weight of the evidence and the time alre…

Source excerpt

• Plea Admissions
• Right To Call Witnesses
• Alibi Evidence
• Criminal Procedure