Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 2 court collections
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 03:42 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

19 Jul 2022

Commercial And Corporate [2022] UGHC 12

Butime v Standard Chartered Bank

Butime v Standard Chartered Bank (Civil Suit No. 963 of 2020) [2022] UGHC 12 (19 July 2022)

Court: High Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Suit No. 963 of 2020
Judge: Kakooza, J

The court found that the plaintiff had a valid cause of action against the defendant, as his account was debited without authorization and the bank owed him a fiduciary duty. While the defendant was not found liable for the underlying fraud, having acted promptly to investigate and refund the money within the stipulated 60 days, the court held that the bank breached its fiduciary duty by failing to communicate the outcome of the investigation to the plaintiff. The indemnity clause did not absolve the bank of liability since the plaintiff did not initiate the transaction. The court awarded gen…

Source excerpt

Banker Customer Relationship
Fiduciary Duty
Unauthorized Debit
Damages Assessment
Interest Award

Read case analysis

19 Jul 2022

Commercial And Corporate [2022] UGCommC 59

Butime Katabarwa v Standard Chartered Bank

Butime Katabarwa v Standard Chartered Bank (Civil Suit No. 963 of 2020) [2022] UGCommC 59 (19 July 2022)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Suit No. 963 of 2020
Judge: Cornelia Kakooza Sabiiti, J

The plaintiff established a cause of action against the defendant by proving that his account was debited without authorization, violating his right to property. The defendant bank owed a fiduciary duty and duty of care to the plaintiff as its customer. Although the bank did not participate in the fraud and took reasonable steps to investigate and refund the money within the stipulated 60 days, it breached its fiduciary duty by failing to communicate the outcome of the investigation to the plaintiff. The indemnity clause did not absolve the bank of liability since the plaintiff did not initia…