Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search
background image
profile image

Court of Appeal of Uganda

The Court of Appeal is the second highest court in the land.  It came into being following the promulgation of the 1995 Constitution, and the enactment of the Judicature Statute, 1996. Article 134 of the Constitution established the structure of the Court of Appeal.

While presiding over matters , it is duly constituted when it consists of an odd number of not less than three (3) justices of the Court of Appeal. It is this court that constitutes itself into a Constitutional Court in accordance with the Constitution to hear constitutional cases.

The Constitutional Court consists of fifteen (15) justices and handles the matters, issues or cases concerning the interpretation of the Constitution  When presiding over a constitutional matter, there must be a quorum of at least five (5) justices of the court.

Physical address
Twed Towers along Kafu Road, Nakasero,Kampala.
Visit website
https://www.judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/77//Court%20of%20Appeal.html
2 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
2 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 2008
Syson Muganga V Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 33/2005) [2008] UGCA 18 (22 September 2008)
Appellant’s attempted murder conviction and life sentence upheld on strong identification, medical evidence, and inferred intent.
Criminal law – attempted murder – intent may be inferred from weapon/substance used and manner of attack; corrosive substance causing extensive burns supports intent. Evidence – identification – prior acquaintance, close proximity and lighting bolster identification evidence. Evidence Act s.45 – medical report admissible when author unavailable if properly identified and explained by a witness. Appellate review – duty of first appellate court to re-appraise evidence and consider mitigation before varying sentence.
 22 September 2008
Shell (U) Ltd v Mukiibi (Civil Appeal No.69 of 2004) [2008] UGCA 35 (2 September 2008)
Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate loss reduced damages by 50% despite defendant’s liability for contaminated fuel.
Tort/Negligence – contaminated fuel supplied by petrol station – liability for damage to vehicle. Mitigation of loss – plaintiff obliged to take reasonable steps to mitigate; failure reduces recoverable damages (here reduced by 50%). Proof of special damages – special damages must be pleaded and proved; general damages may be substituted where specific proof is lacking. Civil procedure – appellate interference with damages – appellate court may revise awards made on wrong principle or manifestly excessive.
 2 September 2008