|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2013 |
|
|
Single-witness identification upheld but malice aforethought not proved; murder conviction reduced to manslaughter and sentence reduced.
Criminal law – Identification – single identification witness credibility; Homicide – malice aforethought – inference from weapon, injuries and surrounding circumstances; Evidence – failure to produce alleged weapon and limits of medical report; Sentencing – substitution of conviction and reduction of sentence.
|
20 December 2013 |
|
Appeal dismissed: plaint rejection does not invoke res judicata; invoice plus acknowledgement can prove payment and ownership.
Civil appeal — preliminary objection on corporate capacity — rejected; res judicata — rejection of plaint permits fresh plaint; interlocutory observations — not binding at trial; invoice and written acknowledgement — admissible proof of payment/contract; appellate review — findings of fact upheld.
|
20 December 2013 |
|
A sale to a bank for a third party breached the Financial Institutions Act; the illegal contract is unenforceable and the suit dismissed.
* Contract law – sale of land – distinction between contract to sell and transfer of legal title; clause providing refund/reversion for defects preventing transfer. * Real property – trust separates legal and beneficial title; missing trust deed and third-party possession prevent perfection of title. * Remedies – specific performance, contractual rescission/refund, and damages; interest awards must be justified and reasonable. * Illegality – Financial Institutions Act s.18(1)(c) prohibits bank acquiring immovable property for third-party clients; contracts in breach are nullities. * Restitution – unjust enrichment principles (Fibrosa) inapplicable where illegality and pari delicto bar relief.
|
20 December 2013 |
|
Conviction for defilement upheld; sentencing was illegal because child-sentencing procedures under the Children Act were not followed, immediate release ordered.
Criminal law – defilement – conviction upheld on credible witness and medical evidence; Children Act – procedure for arrest, remand and sentencing of children; Family and Children Court jurisdiction – requirement to remit convicted children for sentencing; prolonged remand of child offenders and illegality of adult court sentencing.
|
20 December 2013 |
|
Appellant's challenge to a 14-year manslaughter sentence dismissed as not manifestly excessive.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Appeal against sentence only – appellate restraint; standard: manifestly excessive, wrong in principle, or overlooking material factor.
* Sentencing considerations – aggravating factors: brutality, relationship to victim; mitigating factors: age, first offender status, remand period.
* Mitigation – family responsibilities/parenthood generally not a mitigating factor reducing sentence (Nilsson principle).
|
19 December 2013 |
CL|Jurisdiction|Registrar|Late filing and extension of time to appeal|Consent Order
|
19 December 2013 |
|
Appellate court upheld a 16‑year sentence for aggravated defilement; plea procedure irregular but non‑prejudicial.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – sentencing – appellate interference standard for sentence (manifestly excessive/miscarriage of justice). * Criminal procedure – plea-taking – Adan v Republic procedure; irregular plea-taking that is non‑prejudicial. * Sentencing – aggravating factor: offender HIV‑positive and very young victim under amended Penal Code. * Mitigation – remand period, family responsibilities, plea of guilty and repentance.
|
19 December 2013 |
|
Appellate court quashed defilement conviction due to material inconsistencies and inconclusive medical corroboration of penetration.
Criminal law – aggravated defilement – corroboration of sexual intercourse; inconsistencies in prosecution evidence; weight and admissibility of medical and laboratory reports; unsafe conviction; appellate re-evaluation of evidence.
|
17 December 2013 |
|
Appellate court upheld 35-year murder sentences, finding no manifest excessiveness or judicial error in sentencing.
* Criminal law – Murder – Sentencing – Whether sentence is manifestly excessive – Appellate interference only where sentence is manifestly excessive, wrong in principle, or important circumstances ignored – Mitigating factors (age, remand time, reform) and aggravating factors (violence, victim relation) assessed.
|
17 December 2013 |
| November 2013 |
|
|
Sentence reduced after finding excessive reliance on unproven allegations during criminal appeal.
Criminal Law – Appeal – Identification by a single witness – Aggravated robbery – Sentence reduction.
|
29 November 2013 |
|
Court granted bail pending appeal based on advanced age, substantial time served, non-violent offence and substantial sureties with strict conditions.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending appeal – Application governed by Arvind Patel guidelines – Conviction does not automatically preclude bail pending appeal – Factors: advanced age, medical condition, substantial sentence served, non-violent offence, compliance with prior bail and substantial sureties – Bail may be granted subject to stringent conditions.
|
22 November 2013 |
|
Appellant entitled to 12.5% gratuity under new HR manual; URA employees not public officers for pension purposes.
Employment law — HR manual changes — applicability of new HRMM to voluntary retirees; gratuity entitlement — long service award vs gratuity; constitutional law — definition of "public officer" and exclusion of URA employees from pension eligibility; civil procedure — availability of ordinary suit to enforce statutory obligations (NSSF) rather than mandatory judicial review; discrimination — unequal treatment contrary to Article 21.
|
21 November 2013 |
|
Application to admit fresh title evidence on appeal dismissed as irrelevant where appeal arose from a preliminary strike‑out and applicant lacked locus.
Appellate procedure – Admission of additional evidence under Rule 30 – Ladd v Marshall principles – Relevance where appeal arises from a preliminary strike‑out on pleadings; locus standi to challenge repossession/title – government as proper interested party.
|
11 November 2013 |
|
|
6 November 2013 |
|
|
6 November 2013 |
| October 2013 |
|
|
Whether an interim stay is justified where execution was attempted but not completed pending determination of a stay application.
Civil procedure – Interim stay of execution pending appeal; attempted but incomplete execution; consolidation of related stay applications; test for interim relief (proper application, pending substantive stay, imminent threat, proof); deposit of certificate of title as interim security.
|
28 October 2013 |
|
Appellate court found bank and purchaser's sale and transfer fraudulent, invalidated transfer and awarded restitution, damages and costs.
Mortgages and sale of mortgaged land – reappraisal of evidence on first appeal – invalidity for non‑compliance with RTA execution formalities (ss.147–148) – sale by private treaty disguised as auction – fraud and collusion between mortgagee and purchaser – movable assets charged under debenture – remedies include cancellation of transfer, restitution or monetary compensation, damages and interest.
|
24 October 2013 |
|
Leave to appeal granted where High Court’s ownership and fraud findings in objector proceedings raised prima facie appellate grounds.
* Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – Application under Rule 40(2)(b) – Court to determine existence of prima facie grounds, not rehear merits. * Execution/objector proceedings – Release of property from attachment – High Court findings on fraud and ownership may raise appellate issues. * Test for leave – Sango Bay Estates: leave normally granted where prima facie grounds merit serious consideration.
|
21 October 2013 |
|
Court granted leave to appeal, finding prima facie issues of law and fact meriting serious judicial consideration.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – Rules 40(2) and 42(1) – Requirement to apply first in High Court – Sango Bay Estates test for leave: prima facie grounds meriting serious judicial consideration – When High Court refuses leave applicant may apply to Court of Appeal within prescribed time.
|
18 October 2013 |
| September 2013 |
|
|
General, non‑specific appeal grounds struck out; wrongful termination and sexual harassment upheld, Shs.10,000,000 damages affirmed.
• Employment law – wrongful termination – employer failed to prove contractual grounds for termination.• Employment law – sexual harassment – uncontradicted testimony upheld by trial court.• Civil procedure – appeals – grounds of appeal must comply with Rule 86(1) and be specific.• Remedies – general damages for mental suffering, embarrassment and inconvenience upheld as discretionary award.
|
27 September 2013 |
|
|
27 September 2013 |
|
Service on the City Advocate constituted effective service on the Town Clerk; appeal dismissed for failure to rebut.
Local Government Act (Schedule 3, Rule 26) – service of statutory notice – service on City Advocate effective as service on Town Clerk; Evidential burden – stamped and signed annexure to plaint prima facie proof of service; Failure to plead or adduce evidence or cross-examine on service disentitles defendant to later challenge service.
|
25 September 2013 |
|
Court extends time for Attorney General to appeal High Court decision on former employees' pension increments.
Civil procedure – extension of time – sufficient reason for delay – pension entitlements – consent judgment – procedural fairness.
|
13 September 2013 |
|
Appellate court upheld unlawful dismissal and sexual harassment findings, struck vague grounds, and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Employment law – wrongful termination – contract renewal and unlawful dismissal – failure of employer to provide reasons; Sexual harassment – acceptance of unchallenged, detailed testimony; Civil procedure – appellate practice – Rule 86(1) – striking vague grounds of appeal; Remedies – general damages for mental torture, embarrassment and inconvenience.
|
6 September 2013 |
|
Appellate court affirms unlawful termination and sexual harassment findings, upholding general damages and striking vague grounds of appeal.
Employment law – wrongful termination – contract renewal and termination; sexual harassment – acceptance of unchallenged testimony; appellate procedure – general grounds of appeal struck out under Rule 86(1); assessment and quantum of general damages for emotional harm.
|
6 September 2013 |
|
An application to rectify a company register under section 118 is not time‑barred; prior appellate findings of share transfer were binding.
* Company law – Rectification of register of members – application under section 118 – not time‑barred by Limitation Act.
* Precedent/estoppel by record – appellate and Supreme Court findings on share transfer conclusively binding.
* Company articles – nationality restriction v. spouse transfer provision – Article 25 permits transfer to spouse irrespective of nationality.
* Validity of transfer – Company Form No.8 accepted as effective evidence of transfer where higher courts so held.
* Corporate governance – power to order meetings under section 135 to resolve internal disputes; rights of absent claimants to be heard at company meetings.
* Costs – discretionary award upheld where principal reliefs were granted to applicant.
|
4 September 2013 |
|
No statutory right exists to refer a Registrar’s refusal of a stay of execution to a single Justice; application dismissed.
Court of Appeal registrars’ powers under Practice Direction No.1 of 2004; jurisdiction to refer Registrar’s decision to a single Justice; section 12 Judicature Act—single-judge interlocutory powers; Rule 53(2)(b) exclusion of stays from single-judge hearing; appeal/reference as creature of statute; proper forum for stay of execution is a bench of three Justices.
|
2 September 2013 |
|
Judge reduced manifestly excessive instruction fee for a brief interlocutory application, substituting shs.1,000,000/=.
Costs and taxation – instruction fees – whether allowance manifestly excessive; judicial review of taxing officer’s discretion under Rule 110(3); interlocutory vs final character of application relevant to quantum of fees; application of Bank of Uganda v. Banco Arabe Espanol and Premchand Raichand principles.
|
1 September 2013 |
| August 2013 |
|
|
Applicant granted bail pending appeal due to advanced age, ill-health, first-offender status, non-violent conviction, and sufficient sureties.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending appeal – Exceptional circumstances under s.15 Trial of Indictments Act – advanced age, ill-health, first offender, non-violent offence, prior compliance with bail – requirement to guard against absconding – High Court jurisdiction under s.132(4).
|
26 August 2013 |
|
Registrar's extension to serve the record was set aside for lack of sufficient reason and manifest injustice to the applicant.
* Civil procedure – extension of time under Rule 5 (Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules) – requirement to show sufficient and cogent reasons for extension.
* Service of record of appeal – failure to serve for prolonged period and dilatory conduct by counsel – relevance to granting extension.
* Registrar's discretion – must consider manifest injustice to the opposing party; failure may amount to abuse of process.
* Authorities considered: need for particularized explanation beyond ‘honest mistake’; distinction from cases where prompt remedial action occurred.
|
15 August 2013 |
|
|
5 August 2013 |
| July 2013 |
|
|
|
31 July 2013 |
|
|
26 July 2013 |
|
Cancellation of bail as a blanket practice without hearing violates constitutional right to be heard; bail reinstated.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Cancellation of bail without hearing – Breach of Article 28(1) right to fair hearing – Judicial discretion not to be exercised as blanket practice; Interpreter – court duty to secure competent interpreter to protect right to fair trial; Stay – reinstatement of bail renders stay unnecessary.
|
12 July 2013 |
|
A convicted appellant must prove exceptional circumstances with admissible evidence to obtain bail pending appeal; defective affidavits warrant dismissal.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending appeal – Discretionary relief governed by Alvind Patel guidelines and statutory provisions – Convicted appellant bears heavier burden to prove exceptional circumstances (medical condition, infancy, certificate from DPP, likelihood of success) – Adequacy and form of affidavit evidence and supporting documents decisive.
|
5 July 2013 |
| June 2013 |
|
|
Appellate court may grant an interim stay where imminent execution and delay would render an appeal nugatory, despite Rule 42.
* Civil procedure – interim stay of execution – Rule 42(1) and (2) Court of Appeal Rules – when appellate court may entertain stay applications directly to safeguard the right of appeal. * Registrar’s decisions – Reference to single Justice – Practice Direction No.1 of 2004; enhanced powers of Registrars. * Imminent execution and inability to obtain timely High Court relief justify interim stay pending substantive application.
|
14 June 2013 |
| April 2013 |
|
|
|
12 April 2013 |
|
|
9 April 2013 |
| March 2013 |
|
|
Execution after a judgment debtor’s death without requisite notice renders a judicial sale void and title may be set aside.
Civil procedure – Execution against deceased judgment debtor – Requirement to bring legal representatives on record and to issue notice under Order 22 r 19 – Failure to give notice renders judicial sale null and void; Registration of Titles – Title impeachable where fraud/collusion in execution and transfer is established; bona fide purchaser inquiry in judicial sales.
|
18 March 2013 |
|
Appeal dismissed: accomplice evidence was corroborated and common intention established for kidnapping with intent to murder.
* Criminal law – Kidnapping with intent to murder – requirement of contemporaneous intent to kill; inference from surrounding circumstances. * Evidence – Accomplice testimony – need for independent corroboration; accomplice’s testimony cannot corroborate another accomplice. * Criminal liability – Common intention (s.20 Penal Code) – concerted action and probable consequence. * Sentence – appellate review of length and grounds for non-interference.
|
13 March 2013 |
| February 2013 |
|
|
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to tax Advocate/client bills, and no constitutional rights are violated by different taxation scales.
Taxation of costs – Advocate/client bill of costs – Jurisdiction of High Court vs Court of Appeal – Constitutional equality and fair trial claims.
|
13 February 2013 |
|
Court holds advocate/client bills are taxable in the High Court; differential taxation does not breach constitutional rights.
Advocates’ costs – Taxation of advocate/client bills – Rule 109(3) Court of Appeal Rules and section 80 Advocates Act – Advocate/client bills taxable in High Court – Distinction between party-to-party and advocate/client taxation – Constitutional challenge (Articles 21, 26, 28) rejected.
|
13 February 2013 |
|
|
8 February 2013 |
