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
Rwakarara Joseph v Nagayi Annet and Ben Brown (Civil Appeal No. 108 of 2017) [2025] UGCA 214 (26 June 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that the disputed land sale was valid because the wife had actually consented, and restored the appellant’s title, possession, and mesne profits.
Ssebaggala v Kampala Capital City Authority and Kampala District Land Board (CIVIL SUIT NO. 1033 OF 2018) [2025] UGHC 230 (25 April 2025)
The High Court held that Plot 17A was an access road, found the plaintiff had no valid interest in the land, and ordered cancellation of his title.
Nabyonga Grace v Sembatya Abdu and Others (Civil Suit No. 048 of 2013) [2025] UGHC 214 (20 April 2025)
The High Court revoked fraudulently obtained letters of administration, cancelled the plaintiff’s title, restored the land to the estate, and awarded damages and refund orders.
Bachubhai Karsandas Thobani v Mugume and 2 Others (Civil Suit 615 of 2017) [2025] UGHCLD 41 (28 February 2025)
The High Court held that the plaintiff’s lease remained protected by expropriation-related rules, so the land was not available for reallocation and the 1st defendant’s title was cancelled.
Bityo v Komweru and Others (CIVIL SUIT NO.227 OF 2022) [2025] UGHC 231 (3 February 2025)
The court found that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants orchestrated a fraudulent sale of land by misrepresenting the identity of the vendor, registering the land in the name of a deceased person, and concealing the true ownership and interests in the land. The 1st defendant, using her deceased mother's name, fraudulently sold the land to the plaintiff, while the 2nd and 3rd defendants facilitated and benefited from the transaction, knowing the vendor was non-existent and that the land belonged to another. The plaintiff, having paid Ugx 396,000,000 for land he could not possess, was entitled to…
Source excerpt
Muluta v Kalungi (Civil Application 483 of 2024) [2025] UGCA 17 (30 January 2025)
The Court of Appeal of Uganda dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal, finding the applicant had not shown likelihood of success, irreparable harm, or a basis for relief.
Equity Bank Uganda Limited v Begumisa (Miscellaneous Application 144 of 2024) [2024] UGHCLD 241 (15 October 2024)
The court found that the plaint did not disclose a reasonable cause of action against the applicant bank. The plaintiff's claim centered on the illegal and wrongful cancellation of title, but the pleadings failed to link the applicant to the cancellation process or demonstrate any breach of duty or right by the bank. The applicant's role as mortgagee and recipient of funds for releasing its interest was not in dispute and was conducted in accordance with the law. The plaintiff's reliance on the applicant's assurances and payment of money would only be relevant in a claim for negligence or eco…
Source excerpt
Wangi v Commissioner for Land Registration & 3 Others (Miscellaneous Cause 401 of 2023) [2024] UGHCLD 210 (23 August 2024)
The court found that the certificate of purchase issued to the 4th respondent was illegally issued because the statutory procedures for disposal of expropriated property were not followed. The Expropriated Properties Act and its regulations require valuation, determination of reserve price, and sale by competitive tender, none of which occurred in the 4th respondent's acquisition. The chain of transactions leading to the 4th respondent's registration, including transfers after the expulsion of the Asian owners and subsequent dealings, were nullified by section 2(2) of the Act. In contrast, th…
Source excerpt
Kagara and 3 Others v Atamba and 11 Others (Civil Suit 149 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 481 (14 June 2024)
The court found that the Plaintiffs lawfully acquired and occupied the suit land through purchase and first occupation, with the knowledge and approval of local authorities and neighbours, and that the Defendants failed to rebut this evidence. The 1st-5th Defendants fraudulently procured a certificate of title over land already in the Plaintiffs' possession, without involving local authorities or neighbours, and subsequently transferred it to the 6th-10th Defendants, who failed to conduct due diligence. The court held that the 6th-10th Defendants could not be considered bonafide purchasers fo…
Source excerpt
Kibirige v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Application 79 of 2023) [2024] UGHCLD 127 (13 May 2024)
The court found that the applicant's request for mandamus was premature and speculative because there was no evidence that the certificate of title had been found or declared to be illegally or wrongfully obtained as required under Section 91(2) of the Land Act. The allegations of fraud against Haruna Muwanga Kalule, who was not a party to the application, were serious and required specific pleading and strict proof in a formal suit, not affidavit evidence in a miscellaneous application. The court further held that the Commissioner Land Registration lacked the statutory power to cancel the ti…
Source excerpt
