|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2012 |
|
|
An application for review must meet statutory grounds and cannot be based on ignorance of the law or procedural errors alone.
Civil procedure – review of judgment – grounds for review – error on the face of the record – discovery of new and important evidence – summary dismissal of application for review – right to a fair hearing.
|
19 December 2012 |
|
Reimbursement orders against a third party require proof of contractual indemnity and proper Order 1 Rule 18 directions; appeal allowed.
Carriage of goods by rail – loss in transit – evaluation of evidence on shared responsibility; Third‑party proceedings – Order 1 Rule 18 – requirement to apply for directions when seeking contribution/indemnity; Indemnity – liability to third party must be supported by express or implied contract evidence; Procedural irregularity and miscarriage of justice – scheduling memorandum does not cure absence of required third‑party directions or absence of indemnity evidence.
|
14 December 2012 |
|
Court used Rule 36 to correct a clerical omission and grant the appellant a certificate for two counsel.
Appellate procedure – correction of clerical or accidental omissions under Rule 36; power to amend judgment post-delivery; award of certificate for two counsel; absence of respondent objection.
|
13 December 2012 |
|
|
13 December 2012 |
|
Failure to sum up to assessors vitiated the trial; conviction quashed and applicant released in interest of justice.
Criminal procedure – Assessors: mandatory oath and summing-up – omission to swear assessors may be irregular but not always fatal; failure to sum up to assessors is fundamental and vitiates trial; retrial discretion where long delay may justify release.
|
6 December 2012 |
| November 2012 |
|
|
The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the election results as valid amidst unproven allegations of electoral misconduct.
Election Law – Election Petition – Allegations of electoral offences and non-compliance with electoral laws – Burden and standard of proof in election disputes.
|
23 November 2012 |
|
Registrar's extension of time can validate late service of a request for record and prevent striking out of an appeal.
* Civil procedure – striking out appeals – Rule 82: essential steps and prescribed time; * Extension of time – Registrar’s jurisdiction under Practice Direction and Rule 5; * Rule 83(2)-(3) – application for record of proceedings, service and proof of service; * Effect of extension – validation of documents already filed; * Counsel’s inadvertence – remedied by extension where no miscarriage of justice shown.
|
23 November 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed: taxed bill of costs and interest/accountability claims were not proved; each party to bear own costs.
* Civil procedure – security for costs – taxation of a bill of costs and appropriate remedies against a taxed or excessive bill (appeal or review).
* Receivership – duty of receiver to account for all receipts and payments; requirement to prove unexplained debits with admissible evidence.
* Contract/evidence – exclusion of oral evidence that contradicts a written agreement and the burden to prove claimed interest computations.
|
19 November 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed: appellant failed to prove excessive costs, miscomputed interest, or the unexplained ledger debit; costs borne equally.
* Receivership – duty of receiver to account – obligation to provide detailed receipts and payments; proof required for unexplained debits.
* Civil procedure – taxation of costs – remedies against excessive bills of costs lie by appeal or review, not by fresh claim.
* Contracts/evidence – commencement of interest on sale proceeds – interest may run from transfer date if supported by evidence; oral evidence cannot contradict written contract without admissible basis.
* Evidence – admissibility and weight of documents prepared by unqualified persons; requirement to prove special damages.
|
19 November 2012 |
|
Applicant’s breast implant complications deemed a grave illness; bail pending appeal granted subject to strict financial and reporting conditions.
Criminal procedure – bail pending appeal – grant of bail on medical grounds – sufficiency of medical evidence – expert report and oral testimony – grave illness (breast implant rejection) – conditions for bail (cash deposit, sureties, bonds, reporting).
|
15 November 2012 |
| October 2012 |
|
|
High Court erred by disregarding a Court of Appeal interim order, converting a taxation appeal into summary disciplinary action, and displaying bias.
Court of Appeal — interlocutory orders — registrars’ interim orders must be obeyed; Advocates Act — taxation/reference v. disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary Committee’s exclusive procedure for professional misconduct; judicial impartiality — appearance of bias; remedy — setting aside judgment and remitting for rehearing.
|
19 October 2012 |
|
Leave to appeal denied where applicant failed to show prima facie or arguable grounds warranting appellate review.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – Rule 40(1)(a) & (b) Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions; Order 44 Civil Procedure Rules – applicant must show prima facie/arguable grounds of appeal – failure to show reasonable prospects of success – leave refused; case to recommence in High Court.
|
12 October 2012 |
|
Appeal allowed for lack of corroborated evidence proving bribery or substantial non-compliance affecting the election result.
Electoral law – bribery under s.68 PEA – ingredients: gift, giver (candidate/agent), intention to influence a registered voter; partisan witness evidence requires independent corroboration; distinction between illegal practices (bribery) and non-compliance by Electoral Commission (s.61 grounds); appellate re-evaluation of sufficiency of evidence to affect result.
|
5 October 2012 |
| September 2012 |
|
|
CL|Arbitration Award|Set Aside Arbitration Award|Civil Appeal Procedure
|
20 September 2012 |
|
Advocate’s negligence may constitute sufficient cause for extension; defective affidavit should be cured, not cause dismissal.
Civil procedure – Extension of time – Delay caused by counsel’s negligence may constitute sufficient cause under Rule 5; Registrar erred in dismissing application for lack of copy of letter applying for proceedings (r.83(3)) and for defective affidavit; defective affidavit should be struck out/amended, not lead to dismissal; land cases – parties entitled to exhaust appeal rights.
|
7 September 2012 |
|
Failure to serve required appeal documents within ordered time renders an election appeal incompetent and subject to striking out.
Practice and procedure – Election appeals – Service of notice of appeal and request for proceedings within prescribed time (Rule 78(1)); Failure to take essential step – striking out appeal (Rule 82); Time as the essence in election matters; Court orders must be obeyed; Costs where both parties contributed to procedural confusion.
|
5 September 2012 |
| August 2012 |
|
|
Repeated adjournments by the applicant warranted dismissal for want of prosecution; no bias or unfair hearing established.
Election petitions – dismissal for want of prosecution – judicial discretion – need for expedition in election disputes – adjournments – amendment of pleadings – production of documents and cross‑examination – fair hearing under Article 28 – allegation of judicial bias and tests for bias.
|
24 August 2012 |
|
Uncertified declaration forms inadmissible without request; inadequate proof of intimidation; appellant declared validly elected.
Election law – admissibility of Declaration of Results forms; uncertified DR forms require prior request to Electoral Commission or court order to be admissible; substantial effect test for irregularities (Besigye/Kakooza); requirement for corroboration of voter intimidation evidence.
|
13 August 2012 |
|
Whether alleged procedural defects justified striking out a notice of appeal in an election appeal.
Election appeal procedure – timeliness of notice of appeal – service of record of appeal within prescribed period – application for record of proceedings not mandatory – Registrar's certification and certified copies sufficing – striking out notice of appeal.
|
6 August 2012 |
|
Appellant-candidate’s election nullified because his equivalency certificate relied on unauthentic underlying documents; fresh elections ordered.
Election law – Qualification for District Chairperson – A‑Level or equivalent required; Burden of proof lies on candidate under Article 80; NCHE equivalence may be challenged if underlying documents are fraudulent; High Court may inquire into authenticity of supporting certificates; Heightened standard of proof in election petitions.
|
1 August 2012 |
| July 2012 |
|
|
Whether bribery was proved and whether selective trial evaluation violated the petitioners’ right to a fair hearing.
Election law – Allegations of bribery – Ingredients and standard of proof for bribery under s.68 PEA; Evidence – burden of proof and proof of voter status (voter’s card vs voters’ register); Election petitions – appraisal of partisan/accomplice witness evidence and need for corroboration; Procedural fairness – whether selective consideration of pleaded incidents violates right to fair hearing; Remedy – annulment and by-election where bribery proved.
|
20 July 2012 |
|
Bribery allegation unproven and disenfranchisement not shown to have substantially affected the result; petition dismissed.
Election law – bribery: requirement of cogent, corroborated evidence proving all statutory ingredients before annulling an election; Election law – non‑compliance/DR forms: disenfranchisement must be shown to have a substantial effect on result; Appeal – reappraisal of evidence on balance of probabilities; Costs – allocation where Electoral Commission found to have erred in conduct of election.
|
3 July 2012 |
| June 2012 |
|
|
Failure to show sufficient, corroborated reason for delay in an election appeal warranted dismissal of the reference with costs.
Election petitions — extension of time — sufficient cause — mistake of counsel/inadvertence — hearsay and lack of corroboration — strict time limits for election appeals — Rule 83 inapplicable to election petition appeals — judicial discretion and review.
|
28 June 2012 |
|
Failure to prove credible cause or counsel’s verified mistake defeats extension of time in time‑bound election appeals.
* Election petitions – strict time limits – vigilance required; extensions granted only for sufficient cause.
* Extension of time – applicant must produce credible, particularised evidence; affiants or counsel must verify claims of counsel’s inadvertence.
* Mistake of counsel – not automatically excusable; requires proof amounting to an error of judgment or unavoidable mistake.
* Judicial discretion – appellate interference only where misdirection, unreasonable exercise, or manifest injustice shown.
|
28 June 2012 |
|
Leave to appeal under Order 44 must first be sought from the trial/revising court; failure renders the appellate application incompetent.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – Order 44 CPR – Revision orders under section 83 CPA not appealable as of right – Leave must first be sought from the court entertaining the revision; appellate court may be approached only after trial court refuses; mandatory vs directory interpretation of procedural rules; delay and dilatory conduct disentitle applicant to relief.
|
14 June 2012 |
|
The court dismissed an appeal application due to non-compliance with procedural requirements for seeking prior leave from the trial court.
Civil Procedure - application for leave to appeal - necessity of first seeking leave from trial court - procedural compliance required.
|
14 June 2012 |
|
No appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from interlocutory High Court orders in election petitions under s.66(1) PEA; Notice of Appeal struck out.
Parliamentary Elections Act s.66(1) — appealability — appeals permitted only against High Court determinations on election petitions, not interlocutory orders; election petition rules and statutory scheme require expeditious final resolution; Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction is statutory and limited.
|
14 June 2012 |
|
|
14 June 2012 |
|
The court refused the Electoral Commission’s joinder application, holding no necessity or prejudice shown to justify adding it as respondent.
* Civil procedure – Joinder of parties on appeal – Inherent powers of the court (Rule 2(2)) – Requirements to show presence necessary for effectual and complete adjudication or that orders sought will affect the person’s interests. * Principles – a person should not be compelled to be sued where appellant has no cause of action against them; appeals decided on record of lower court. * Election procedure – recount order challenged on appeal; joinder of electoral body not justified without specific prejudice or material evidence.
|
13 June 2012 |
|
Failure to serve notice within seven days is a technical irregularity absent prejudice; Electoral Commission’s breaches annulled the election.
* Electoral law – service of Notice of Presentation of petition – requirement directory, not jurisdictional, where no prejudice. * Evidence – affidavits in election petitions – liberal approach to illiterate deponents; exclusion warranted for hearsay or matters beyond personal knowledge. * Electoral Commission duty – proper counting, certification and accounting of ballots; failure may substantially affect results. * Relief – where non‑compliance substantially affects result, election may be annulled and fresh election ordered. * Costs – where Commission’s failures cause annulment, Commission liable for costs.
|
11 June 2012 |
|
Court upheld revocation of fraudulent Letters of Administration, finding mismanagement and exclusion of rightful beneficiaries from the deceased's estate.
Succession and administration of estates – Fraudulent procurement of Letters of Administration – Exclusion of beneficiaries – Mismanagement of estate – True and correct inventory – Appointment of administrators – Evaluation of oral evidence in the absence of scientific (DNA) evidence – Civil procedure – Costs – Allegation of judicial bias.
|
8 June 2012 |
| May 2012 |
|
|
Wrongful dismissal affirmed; reinstatement refused under s.71; damages upheld; appeal dismissed with costs.
Public service dismissal – constitutional protection of tenure (Article 173) – dismissal requires just cause and proper procedure; Employment Act s.71 – reinstatement discretionary with specified exceptions; damages – appellate interference only for wrong principle or manifestly excessive/low award; common law principles on dismissal incorporated into domestic law; vicarious liability question considered but appeal dismissed.
|
29 May 2012 |
|
Unsigned polling DRs do not automatically invalidate votes where corroborated by originals and agents’ signatures.
* Election law – validity of Declaration of Results (DR) forms – effect of presiding officer’s non-signature.
* Election procedure – admissibility of unsigned certified DR copies where originals or corresponding documents corroborate results.
* Recount – discretionary remedy, granted only on evidence of good grounds or mistakes by returning officer.
* Principle against disenfranchisement – procedural defects should not nullify voters’ choices absent substantial effect.
|
25 May 2012 |
|
Assault causing actual bodily harm not 'moral turpitude' absent conduct shocking to the community; appeal dismissed.
* Constitutional law – Election qualifications – Article 80(2)(f) – disqualification for conviction of a crime involving dishonesty or moral turpitude.* Definition and test for moral turpitude – requires extreme wickedness shocking to the moral sense of the community; case-by-case factual assessment.* Evidence of community reaction/electoral outcome may be relevant to whether conduct is morally shocking.* Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (light physical assault) not necessarily a crime involving moral turpitude.
|
24 May 2012 |
|
Whether the respondent met the statutory A‑level education requirement and whether his affidavits were valid for the election petition.
* Constitutional and electoral law – qualification for parliamentary candidates – meaning of “formal education” and A‑level requirement; non‑retroactivity of Education Act 2008. * Administrative law – Electoral Commission’s duties at nomination – pleading requirements for cause of action. * Evidence and procedure – admissibility of affidavits – oath or affirmation consistent with religious freedom and Oaths Act construction. * Civil procedure – striking out pleadings and consequences; costs follow the event.
|
21 May 2012 |
|
A plea of causation and mitigation and a typographical error do not justify striking out a defence; matter must proceed to trial.
Civil procedure – striking out pleadings – standard for defences (O.6 r.8 CPR); inherent jurisdiction (s.98 Civil Procedure Act) to prevent abuse of process to be exercised sparingly; causation and mitigation as substantive defences affecting liability and quantum; typographical/technical errors curable to secure substantive justice.
|
21 May 2012 |
|
A parliamentary election was nullified after the elected member was found to have used forged academic documents for nomination.
Election petition – Academic qualifications – Use of forged diploma for university admission and parliamentary nomination – Burden of proof in cases of fraud – Admissibility of affidavits and electronic evidence – Nullification of election for lack of requisite qualifications.
|
16 May 2012 |
|
Stay of proceedings denied; Registrar's limitations emphasized, conserving status quo pending High Court decisions.
Civil procedure - Stay of proceedings - Judicial authority of registrars to issue interim orders - Appeal process and discretion.
|
11 May 2012 |
| April 2012 |
|
|
Failure by the intending appellant to take essential steps (including lodging the Record of Appeal) led to striking out the election appeal.
Election law – appeal prosecution – Rule 29,30,31 Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules; computation of time – exclusion of judgment day (Interpretation Act/Rule 4 Judicature Rules); duty of intending appellant to take essential steps; failure to obtain/ lodge Record of Appeal; strike out under Rule 82.
|
30 April 2012 |
|
An intending appellant’s failure to take essential, timely steps in an election appeal justified striking out the appeal and costs.
* Election law – appeal procedure – computation of time; written notice of appeal excludes day of judgment. * Court of Appeal Rules/Parliamentary Elections Rules – essential steps: filing/serving notice, filing memorandum, lodging record of appeal. * Procedural law – duty of intending appellant to diligently prosecute appeal; failure to request certified record or seek extensions justifies strike-out under Rule 82. * Election appeals – requirement for expedition and refusal to excuse unexplained delay that undermines timely disposal.
|
30 April 2012 |
|
Applicant failed to show prima facie case or irreparable harm to enjoin a near-complete public inquiry.
Constitutional law – interim relief; temporary injunction – requirements of prima facie case, irreparable harm and balance of convenience; allegations of bias in public inquiries; delay/laches and public interest where inquiry is near completion.
|
30 April 2012 |
|
Failure to serve the letter requesting High Court proceedings is a fatal defect warranting striking out Notice of Appeal.
* Election law – procedural compliance – service of written application requesting High Court proceedings – Rule 83(3) Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) – failure to serve is an essential, fatal omission. * Election petitions – time is of the essence – strict construction of rules. * Remedy – striking out of Notice of Appeal and costs to successful applicant.
|
30 April 2012 |
|
Late payment of fees treated as irregularity; uncorroborated partisan evidence failed to prove electoral bribery.
Election law – timeliness and court fees – presentation versus filing; electoral bribery – ingredients: gift to a registered voter, giver’s intent to influence voting; corroboration required for partisan witnesses; right to fair hearing – parties must be heard on jurisdictional/filing irregularities.
|
20 April 2012 |
|
No appeal to the Court of Appeal lies from a High Court decision on electoral complaints where statute and Constitution make it final.
Election law — Appeals — Finality of High Court decisions under Article 64(4) Constitution and section 15(4) Electoral Commission Act; Competency of appeal to Court of Appeal; Integrity of court record — alleged forged leave-to-appeal entry; Registrar and advocate professional conduct referral to Law Council.
|
17 April 2012 |
|
Election results were nullified due to bribery at Ruharo Church, requiring fresh elections in the constituency.
Electoral law – election petition – voter transfer impact on election results – bribery and illegal practices.
|
17 April 2012 |
|
|
13 April 2012 |
| March 2012 |
|
|
Appeal allowed: disqualification for alleged forged qualifications overturned; breach of fair hearing was fatal.
Election petition – qualification for nomination – Makerere Mature Age Entry Examinations and NCHE equivalence – burden of proof for alleged forgery; Evidence Act S.72 – handwriting comparison requires caution and expert evidence; right to a fair hearing – cross-examination of court-called witness; consolidation of petitions and technical defects cured by Article 126(2)(e).
|
30 March 2012 |
|
|
30 March 2012 |
|
|
30 March 2012 |
|
|
20 March 2012 |
