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.
146 judgments
Skip past years
Skip past months
Skip to results

Results. 146 judgments found.

146 judgments
July 2015
13 July 2015
Part‑performance validated an unsigned building contract and arbitral award; respondent’s challenge was time‑barred under the Arbitration Act.
  • Arbitration law
    • — Arbitration agreement — Existence and validity — Part performance may validate unsigned written agreement
    • — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Competence to rule on jurisdiction — s.16(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act — 30‑day challenge period
    • — Setting aside arbitral award — Time bar — s.34(3) Arbitration and Conciliation Act — One‑month limitation
13 July 2015
Notice of appeal struck out for non‑compliance with mandatory 60‑day filing rule and Rule 83 proof requirements.
  • Civil procedure — Appeals — Computation of time and exclusion for registrar's delay — Requirement of written application and proof of service under Court of Appeal Rules 83(2)–(3) — Failure to comply warrants striking out
7 July 2015
7 July 2015
  • Civil Procedure
2 July 2015
  • Civil Procedure
1 July 2015
June 2015
The court held that a prior lease offer from the District Land Board prevails over an unproven customary tenure granted by local elders.
  • Land law — Customary tenure — Requirements for proof — Priority of competing equitable interests — Authority of District Land Board in land allocation — Lease offers and equitable interest in land
30 June 2015
30 June 2015
A later occupier cannot acquire customary title without proof against an earlier equitable lease offer.
  • Land law
    • — Customary tenure — Proof of custom required under Evidence Act s.46 and authorities
    • — Title/Equity — Lease offer confers an equitable interest; competing equities resolved in favour of first in time (priority)
30 June 2015
  • Criminal law
30 June 2015
Conviction for grievous bodily harm upheld; compensation order set aside and excessive default imprisonment reduced to 12 months.
  • Criminal law — Identification evidence — Re‑evaluation by first appellate court — Known witnesses and daylight identification
  • Criminal procedure — Compensation order — Necessity for reasons and basis under Magistrates Courts Act s.197 — Default imprisonment limit under s.180
25 June 2015
  • Land
24 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure|Contract Law
24 June 2015
  • Criminal law
24 June 2015
  • Criminal law
24 June 2015
24 June 2015
23 June 2015
23 June 2015
19 June 2015
A second appeal raising factual issues is incompetent under section 72 and was struck out with no costs.
  • Civil procedure — Second appeal — Limitation to questions of law under s.72 Civil Procedure Act — Mixed fact and law grounds incompetent
  • Evidence — Appellate re‑evaluation — First appellate court duty to reappraise; second appeal limited to points of law
  • Costs — Failure to appear — No order as to costs where respondent and counsel absent
19 June 2015
  • Criminal appeal—murder—juvenile offender—shared representation—conflict of interest—conflicting defences—right to fair hearing—procedural fairness—nullity of trial
19 June 2015
18 June 2015
17 June 2015
Appeal reduces manifestly excessive rape sentence and clarifies compensation power and enforcement considerations.
  • Criminal law — Sentencing — Manifestly excessive sentence — Appellate interference where court acted on wrong principle or overlooked material factors
  • Criminal procedure — Compensation — Power to award compensation under s126 Trial on Indictments Act; s129B Penal Code Amendment Act inapplicable to rape — Enforcement considerations under s116
15 June 2015
15 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure
12 June 2015
  • Criminal law
12 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure
12 June 2015
Consecutive sentences for distinct offences are permissible; concurrency is the exception, not the rule.
  • Criminal law — Aggravated defilement — Sentencing — Consecutive versus concurrent sentences — Judicial discretion — Trial on Indictments Act (s.2(2)/s.122) — Concurrency as exception
12 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure
11 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure
11 June 2015
  • Civil Procedure
10 June 2015
2 June 2015
A successor trial judge may set aside an interlocutory ex‑parte order; such an order is not res judicata.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Interlocutory orders — Setting aside ex‑parte order by successor judge — Change of judicial officer does not alter the courts jurisdiction
    • — Res judicata — Interlocutory ex‑parte order is not a final adjudication and does not bar subsequent application to set it aside
2 June 2015
Whether participation in mob violence can establish common intention to murder and whether life imprisonment was excessive.
  • Criminal law
    • — Common intention — Liability of mob participants for murder under section 20 of the Penal Code
    • — Homicide — Determination of malice aforethought from nature of weapons, injuries and conduct
    • — Sentencing — Appellate interference limited unless sentence is manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
2 June 2015
Whether malice aforethought and safe single‑witness identification support murder convictions and a death sentence.
  • Criminal law — Murder — Malice aforethought — Inference from mode of killing, weapon and injuries — Penal Code s 191
  • Criminal procedure — Identification evidence — Single identifying witness and voice identification — Familiarity and conditions for safe identification
  • Sentencing — Death penalty — Appellate interference — Manifestly excessive test
2 June 2015
May 2015
Murder conviction substituted with manslaughter where malice aforethought was not established; sentence reduced to seven years.
  • Criminal law — Homicide — Murder v. manslaughter — Proof of malice aforethought; consideration of weapon, manner, part injured and post‑mortem evidence
  • Criminal procedure — Assessors — Failure to invite objections and to sum up to assessors — Omission not necessarily fatal unless it causes substantial miscarriage of justice
28 May 2015
Cancellation of an EIA certificate without a hearing is void; certiorari and compensatory general damages may follow.
  • Administrative law
    • — Judicial review — Fair hearing and natural justice — Cancellation of EIA certificate — Certiorari to quash administrative act
    • — Remedies — Damages in judicial review — Rule 8 Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 — Special damages require specific pleading and strict proof
  • Civil procedure — Parties — Suit against public officers in official capacity — Executive Director of statutory authority may be sued and authority liable for decretal sums
27 May 2015
Murder convictions upheld; death sentences quashed and replaced with life imprisonment due to harshness and mitigating factors.
  • Criminal law
    • — Identification evidence — Known-person identification by sight and voice; proximity, moonlight and torchlight supporting reliability
    • — Common intention — Joint entry and conduct after shooting as basis for inferring shared intent
  • Sentencing — Death penalty — Appellate reduction where sentence is harsh or excessive considering age, remand and remorse
27 May 2015
Court upheld a 32‑year sentence, allowed mental‑state mitigation to avoid death, and corrected sentence commencement to 25.10.2002.
  • Criminal law — Sentencing
    • — Manifestly harsh or excessive — Standard for appellate interference
    • — Mental disorder/diminished responsibility — Relevance at sentencing to exclude capital punishment and as mitigation
  • Criminal procedure — Commencement of sentence — Sentence deemed to run from date of original sentence — Criminal Procedure Act s.40(6)
27 May 2015
Leave to appeal refused where security‑for‑costs application rested on irrelevant fee arguments and false affidavits.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Security for costs — Application under Order 26 — Relevance of filing fees and grounds for ordering security
    • — Court fees — Computation of value of subject matter and whether compound interest must be included — Statutory construction of fees rules
    • — Leave to appeal — Discretion to grant leave, abuse of process and interference with trial court's discretion
27 May 2015
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed where arbitrariness and causation of financial loss were not proven.
  • Criminal law
    • — Abuse of office — Whether conduct constituted an "arbitrary act" prejudicial to employer
    • — Causing financial loss — Whether non‑compliance with PPDA suffices to infer or prove loss
  • Public procurement — PPDA Regulations — Retrospective variation approvals and responsibility of Contracts Committee/Accounting Officer
22 May 2015
22 May 2015
21 May 2015
Occupation of a road reserve cannot confer bona fide occupancy, customary tenancy, or adverse possession; lease to respondent upheld.
  • Land law
    • — Bona fide occupancy — Meaning under s.29 Land Act; requires registered land under Registration of Titles Act
    • — Customary tenure — Abolition in gazetted urban areas and requirement to prove customary rules and practice
  • Property law — Adverse possession — Occupation in contravention of statute (road reserve) cannot ripen into title
20 May 2015
Court held the respondent’s forensic audit was a preliminary fact‑finding exercise and dismissed the applicants’ challenge.
  • Administrative law
    • — Investigative committees — Proper appointment and powers of a forensic audit under s.4 and s.8 of the Law Development Centre Act
    • — Natural justice — Preliminary fact‑finding investigations do not necessarily attract hearing rights applicable to tribunals
    • — Academic awards — Questions of functus officio and revocation of diplomas are premature until a final adverse decision is made
14 May 2015
6 May 2015
April 2015
29 April 2015
29 April 2015
22 April 2015