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
Mbaine & 4 Ors Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 017 of 2013) [2018] UGCA 93 (2 October 2018)
The Court of Appeal set aside the aggravated robbery conviction for lack of proof of theft, upheld the language complaint, and reduced the firearm and ammunition sentences.
Opio Bua James v Uganda (M.A. No.33 Of 2008) (M.A. No.33 of 2008) [2008] UGHC 85 (23 May 2008)
The High Court of Uganda dismissed a bail application, finding no exceptional circumstances and noting contradictions in the applicant’s affidavit.
Gbonyo Joseph v Uganda (Revision Order No. 29/91) [1991] UGHC 87 (3 May 1991)
The court found that the plea of 'I admit' was not unequivocal and did not amount to an admission of all the essential ingredients of the offence, particularly as the facts narrated did not establish that the accused lacked a valid firearm certificate or that the items were indeed ammunition as defined by law. The absence of expert identification and the failure to aver the lack of a firearm certificate rendered the plea and conviction defective. Furthermore, the default sentence of 10 months imprisonment for non-payment of a fine of UGX 10,000 was illegal as it exceeded the statutory maximum…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Obonyo (Criminal Revision 29 of 1991) [1991] UGHC 67 (3 May 1991)
The court found that the plea of 'I admit' was equivocal and did not admit all the essential ingredients of the offence, particularly as the narrated facts failed to establish that the objects were live ammunition and did not aver that the accused lacked a valid firearm certificate. The conviction was therefore bad in law and must be quashed. Additionally, the default sentence of 10 months imprisonment for non-payment of a fine of Shs. 10,000/= was illegal as it exceeded the statutory maximum of one month. Both the conviction and sentence were set aside.
Source excerpt
Kimari and Others v Reginam (Criminal Appeals Nos. 216, 217, 218, 219, 220 and 221. of 1955) [1955] EACA 345 (1 January 1955)
The court held that the police officer's evidence regarding the home-made gun was properly admitted as expert evidence, as he demonstrated sufficient practical experience with such weapons. The trial judge was entitled to rely on his opinion that the gun was a lethal firearm. On the issue of joint possession, the court found that the evidence supported the conclusion that the appellants were acting together as a gang of terrorists and that at least some of them had knowledge of the firearm and ammunition. However, the court determined that mere presence in a confined space was insufficient to…
Source excerpt
