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
Ven Group Limited & Another v Uganda Registration Services Bureau & Another (Civil Suit 919 of 2019) [2025] UGCommC 17 (20 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed a claim over seized music equipment, finding the seizure was statutorily authorised under copyright law and not conversion.
M/S Urgent Cargo Handling Limited and Another v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-04-CV-CS-0026-2012) [2017] UGHC 121 (25 April 2017)
The High Court held that the plaintiffs proved unlawful seizure of an empty truck and unlawful arrest of the second plaintiff, awarding damages, lost earnings, and costs.
Rashid Ssenyonjo Lwanga t/a Namengo Merchandise v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Suit No.569 of 2003) [2004] UGHC 38 (22 June 2004)
The High Court of Uganda dismissed a claim for return of batteries, finding the goods seized by URA were smuggled and not the plaintiff’s lawfully imported goods.
Uganda v Muhwezi Blazio (HCT-05-CR-SC-0049 of 2003) (HCT-05-CR-SC-0049 of 2003) [2004] UGHC 23 (22 June 2004)
The High Court held that batteries seized by URA were smuggled goods misdeclared and diverted from customs control, not the plaintiff’s lawfully imported goods.
Danze Entp & 7 Ors v Commissioner General (Misc. Appl. No. 955 of 1997) [1997] UGHC 3 (24 November 1997)
The High Court ordered seized trade goods to be valued, inspected, and sold under supervision to prevent deterioration, pilferage, and mounting storage costs.
Diplomatic Duty Free Services Limited v The Commissioner General of Uganda Revenue Authority & Another (Civil Application 29 of 1994) [1994] UGHC 65 (25 February 1994)
The court found that the applicant had established prima facie grounds for leave to apply for judicial review by demonstrating that the respondents' intended sale of goods could adversely affect its rights and that the connection to taxes owed by a third party warranted judicial scrutiny. The court granted leave and issued interim orders restraining the respondents from selling or disposing of the goods pending the outcome of the main application, ensuring the applicant's interests are protected until a full hearing.
Source excerpt
