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
Tom Walusimbi v Andrew Kisawuzi (Civil Appeal No. 37 of 2013) [2025] UGCA 225 (11 July 2025)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a challenge to title over a motor vehicle, holding the sale was not in market overt and the seller could not pass good title.
Karungi Elizabeth v Cairo Bank Uganda Limited and Kkingo Parents’ Transporters Company Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 303 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 187 (23 June 2025)
The court found that the issues raised in the application and the main suit had already been litigated and determined in Masaka High Court Civil Suit No. 20/2022 between the same parties regarding the same subject matter. The applicant's attempt to amend the plaint in the present suit was an abuse of court process, as it sought to re-litigate matters already decided, merely adding a new party (the bank) as a cosmetic change. The doctrine of res judicata, as codified in Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and interpreted in relevant case law, precluded the court from entertaining the applicat…
Source excerpt
Karungi Elizabeth v Cairo Bank Uganda Limited and Kkingo Parents’ Transporters Company Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 99 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 185 (23 June 2025)
The application for discovery is barred by the doctrine of res judicata because the same issues and parties were previously litigated and determined in Civil Suit No. 20/2022 at Masaka High Court. The applicant and the 2nd respondent were parties to that suit, which involved the same subject matter—the sale and ownership of the four Isuzu buses. Judgment was entered against the applicant, and the matter cannot be re-litigated in this court. The addition of Cairo Bank as a party does not alter the fact that the core dispute has already been adjudicated. The principle of res judicata estops the…
Source excerpt
W.K's Hardware Ltd & Another v BPC Chemicals Limited (Civil Appeal 85 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 254 (5 May 2025)
The High Court allowed a civil appeal over a disputed supply-of-goods contract, finding the respondent had not proved breach and ordering return of rejected goods.
Kkingo Parents Transporters Co. Ltd v Karungi Elizabeth (Civil Suit 20 of 2022) [2025] UGHC 197 (16 April 2025)
The Court found that a valid contract existed between the Plaintiff and Defendant for the sale of four buses, with clear terms regarding payment. The Defendant breached the contract by failing to pay the outstanding balance as agreed, despite demand notices and partial payments. The Plaintiff proved the breach and the resulting loss on a balance of probabilities, supported by documentary evidence. The Court awarded the Plaintiff the outstanding balance, general and special damages, interest at 18% per annum from the date of filing until payment in full, and costs, as the remedies were justifi…
Source excerpt
Automan International (U) Limited v Dahable Limited & Another (Civil Suit 545 of 2023) [2025] UGCommC 40 (28 March 2025)
The High Court awarded the plaintiff unpaid purchase price, interest, general damages, and costs, but refused to lift the corporate veil to make the second defendant personally liable.
Prism Construction Co. Ltd v Glowline Investments Ltd and Musoke Warren (Miscellaneous Cause N0. 115 OF 2024) [2025] UGCommC 82 (25 March 2025)
The High Court held that a vehicle sale/purchase agreement, not a loan or pledge, had been executed. It dismissed the application to deposit money in court and to recover the vehicles.
Kaweesi v Ali Motors (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 2169 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 53 (17 February 2025)
The High Court granted the applicant unconditional leave to defend a summary suit over an excavator sale, finding triable issues on alleged misrepresentation and machine condition.
Muhangi & Another v Ssekubwa (Civil Appeal 42 of 2022) [2025] UGHCCD 1 (2 January 2025)
The High Court allowed a civil appeal, set aside an order releasing a disputed vehicle, and held the appellants’ custody was lawful as estate administrators.
Arrow Centre (U) Ltd v Polat Yol Yapi Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi (Civil Suit 534 of 2024) [2024] UGCommC 375 (23 December 2024)
The High Court held that the defendant breached a tyre supply contract, awarded the unpaid UGX 62,128,000, general damages, interest, and costs.
