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
Kwehayo John Baptist v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCRD 19 (15 May 2025)
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, varied a 10-year wildlife sentence, and imposed a net term of 4 years, 10 months, and 19 days after remand deduction.
China Railway 18th Bureau Group Co. Limited v Uganda (Criminal Revision 10 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 48 (19 February 2025)
The Chief Magistrate's order of forfeiture of Motor Vehicle Registration No. UAW 527Z was made without affording the Applicant, the registered owner and a non-party to the criminal proceedings, an opportunity to be heard as required by law. The Uganda Wildlife Act provides that forfeiture as an additional penalty may only be imposed on property of the convict, and where the property belongs to a non-convict, a conditional order of forfeiture must be made following an application by the Executive Director, with notice and opportunity for the owner to contest. The procedure under sections 74 an…
Source excerpt
Habimana and Another v Uganda (HCT-01-CR-CN 8 of 2021) [2023] UGHCCRD 57 (31 August 2023)
The High Court reduced sentences for two refugee appellants convicted under the Wildlife Act, finding the trial court had imposed harsh and excessive penalties.
Mbaya v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 52 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCRD 73 (17 February 2023)
The court found that the plea taking process was fundamentally flawed because the trial court did not break down and explain each constituent element of the offences to the appellant, nor did it record his answers to each element. This failure contravened the requirements for a fair trial and proper plea taking as established in Adan vs Republic and Article 28(3)(b) of the Constitution. The lack of clarity as to what the appellant admitted rendered the conviction unsafe and occasioned a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, both the conviction and sentence were set aside, and a retrial was or…
Source excerpt
Mbaya Kabongo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 52 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCRD 70 (17 February 2023)
The High Court set aside a guilty plea conviction for wildlife offences, finding the charges were not properly explained before plea, and ordered a retrial.
Asaba Ramadhan v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 69 of 2021) [2022] UGHCCRD 46 (12 May 2022)
High Court of Uganda partially varied a 5-year sentence for unlawful possession of elephant ivory, adding an option to pay a 1,250 currency point fine.
Masaba v Uganda (HCT-00-AC-CN-NO. 022 of 2014) [2015] UGHCCRD 45 (28 October 2015)
The High Court found that the trial magistrate acted on correct sentencing principles by considering the Sentencing Guidelines, which require courts to take into account the period spent on remand. The court is not required to explicitly state or arithmetically deduct the remand period, and the sentences imposed were well below the statutory maximums. The offences involved prohibited goods (ivory), for which no dutiable value could be attached, justifying the choice of imprisonment over a fine. The sentences were neither illegal nor manifestly excessive, and all relevant factors were consider…
Source excerpt
Mohamed and Another v Rex (Cr. Apps. 35 and 36 of .1930 (Msa.).) [1930] EACA 158 (1 January 1930)
The court held that the Game Ordinance, when read as a whole, demonstrates a clear legislative intention to treat each contravention in respect of every animal as a separate offence. Section 44(1) expressly provides for penalties in respect of each additional animal, and the absence of a specific penalty for subsequent animals in section 11 does not preclude the imposition of further penalties under section 44(1). The court rejected the argument that the offence constituted a single act and affirmed that the Magistrate was justified in imposing a fine for the first trophy under section 11 and…
Source excerpt
