|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2022 |
|
|
Single-judge Court of Appeal stayed payment of a High Court fine but declined to stay subsequent committal absent an appeal.
Court of Appeal – interim stay of execution – Rule 6(2)(b) Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules – requirement of notice of appeal and pending substantive application – preservation of status quo to prevent nugatory appeal – limits on appellate jurisdiction to stay subsequent, unappealed High Court orders – effect of enforcement (arrest/committal) overtaking interim relief.
|
25 February 2022 |
|
Single-Justice decision referred to full bench on whether interlocutory High Court order is covered by a notice of appeal; release declined.
Civil Procedure – Reference to full bench – Whether a single-Justice decision may be referred under sections 76 and 77 where a notice of appeal may cover interlocutory orders. Jurisdiction – Whether a single Justice had jurisdiction to consider High Court interlocutory orders and grant interim release. Inherent powers – Scope of Rule 2(2) and effect of being functus officio on granting interim relief.
|
25 February 2022 |
|
Interim stay refused because High Court dismissal is a negative order not capable of execution; application incompetent and dismissed with costs.
• Civil procedure – Stay of execution – interim orders pending appeal – prerequisites for grant; • Civil procedure – Decree capable of execution – section 38 Civil Procedure Act; dismissal as negative order not executory; • Land disputes – possession and third-party purchasers – prejudice and protection of status quo; • Procedural competence – requirement of an executory decree before a stay may be granted.
|
25 February 2022 |
|
Appellate court re-sentenced appellant for heroin possession due to missing valuation certificate, imposing UGX 10,000,000 fine and 10-year default term.
Criminal law – Narcotic drugs – Possession of heroin – sentencing under section 4(1),(2)(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act 2015. Sentencing – absence of valuation certificate under section 91(1) – effect on fines based on market value. Sentencing – statutory alternative minimum fine (500 currency points) and default imprisonment. Appeals – appellate court’s duty to re-sentence where first appellate order is incomplete or inconsistent.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
An appellate court upheld a 36-year sentence for aggravated robbery, finding no miscarriage in the trial court's sentencing.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – Sentence – Appellate interference with sentencing – Whether trial court considered mitigating factors – Clerical error in judgment not altering conviction – Sentencing guidelines and precedents; manifest excessiveness test.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Whether minor inconsistencies and intact hymen preclude conviction for aggravated defilement and whether 32-year sentence is excessive.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – Definition of "sexual act" includes sexual touching without penetration; victims' testimony as primary evidence in sexual offences; medical evidence not determinative of absence of sexual act. Evidence – Contradictions and inconsistencies – Minor inconsistencies by young victims excusable and do not necessarily vitiate prosecution case unless demonstrating deliberate untruthfulness. Sentencing – Application of sentencing guidelines and principle of uniformity; appellate restraint unless sentence illegal or manifestly excessive.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Court upheld convictions on reliable identification and admissible confessions but reduced an excessive sentence to 14½ years.
Criminal law – identification by a sole witness; corroboration – admissibility of charge and caution statements from illiterates lacking formal translation certificate; aggravated robbery – non‑recovery of weapon not fatal where reliable description and physical evidence exist; appellate review – reappraisal of evidence and power to vary sentence for excessiveness.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
The applicant failed to prove the bank statement was newly discovered; application to admit additional evidence dismissed.
Appeal — Additional evidence — Admissibility of bank statement as newly discovered evidence — Requirement of due diligence, relevance, credibility and absence of undue delay — RTGS banking records — Court’s discretion — Dismissal where evidence likely available at trial.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Re-sentencing after mandatory death penalty requires consideration of mitigating factors; death discretionary but cannot be imposed as of course.
Criminal law – Murder – Re-sentencing after mandatory death penalty declared unconstitutional – Requirement to consider mitigating factors; Death sentence remains discretionary (not mandatory); Appellate interference where sentencing judge ignores mitigating circumstances; Credit for time on remand; Consistency in sentencing and reliance on comparable authorities.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Appeal against a 25-year murder sentence dismissed; trial judge properly exercised sentencing discretion and remand time was duly considered.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentence – appellate review of sentencing discretion; consistency in sentencing and parity; remand time and crediting of time served; retrospective application of subsequent judicial rulings on remand credit.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Respondent's wrongful and fraudulent encumbrance of appellants' land titles warranted release, damages, interest and costs.
Mortgage registration – wrongful encumbrance of land title – error versus fraud – forged stamp duty certificate – breach of fiduciary duty – contempt for failure to return title – entitlement to general damages, interest and costs.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Court granted interim stay of eviction execution pending appeal, holding a Notice of Appeal suffices for interim relief.
Civil procedure – Interim stay of execution – Rule 2(2) Court of Appeal Rules – inherent jurisdiction to preserve right of appeal. Interim relief – Valid Notice of Appeal sufficient for interim stay of execution. Execution/eviction – Imminent threat of execution justifies interim preservation of status quo.
|
23 February 2022 |
|
Court dismissed applicants' interim injunction to prevent decommissioning because their judicial review was time‑barred.
Court of Appeal — interim injunction pending appeal; effect of High Court dismissal as time‑barred on interim relief; preservation of appeal and avoidance of nugatory proceedings; requirement of legal/equitable interest and joinder of third parties; jurisdictional limits where lease renewal lies before separate authority.
|
22 February 2022 |
|
Circumstantial evidence proved the appellant an accessory after the fact, not the principal murderer; conviction substituted and immediate release ordered.
Criminal law – murder – proof beyond reasonable doubt – post‑mortem finding of suffocation; Circumstantial evidence – caution and reappraisal – distinguishing principal offender from accessory; Accessory after the fact – s.206 Penal Code; Trial procedure – summing up to assessors (TIA s.82) – record irregularity; Sentence – time served and entitlement to immediate release.
|
21 February 2022 |
|
Appellate court upheld a 20-year sentence for aggravated defilement of a five-year-old as not excessive.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – sentencing principles – appellate interference only where sentence is illegal or manifestly excessive; Sentencing Guidelines (start point 35 years) and comparative authorities relevant to proportionality and consistency.
|
21 February 2022 |
|
|
21 February 2022 |
|
|
21 February 2022 |
|
Whether identification and minor inconsistencies sustain a murder conviction and whether the original sentence was excessive and should be reduced.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – familiarity, adequate light, proximity and sufficient observation time as safeguards against mistaken identity. Evidence – contradictions and inconsistencies – distinction between minor/explainable inconsistencies and material contradictions going to the root of the case. Criminal procedure – effect of deliberate falsehoods by accused on credibility and strengthening prosecution case. Sentencing – application of Constitutional Sentencing Guidelines; consistency and uniformity of sentences; deduction for time spent on remand.
|
21 February 2022 |
|
|
15 February 2022 |
|
|
15 February 2022 |
|
|
15 February 2022 |
|
|
14 February 2022 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and recent possession upheld convictions; sentences reduced for excessiveness and parity.
Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence and identification – recent possession of stolen property as strong presumption of participation; Alibi defences – prosecution duty to disprove when evidence places accused at scene; Sentencing – appellate interference where sentence is manifestly excessive, parity and consistency of sentences; Evidence – evaluation of corroboration and credibility; Procedural – effect of jumping bail on sentencing commencement.
|
14 February 2022 |
|
Life sentence for aggravated defilement reduced to 20 years for failure to apply sentencing consistency and consideration of aggravating factors.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – Proof of age and HIV-positive status as aggravating factor; Sentencing – appellate interference where sentence is illegal, wrong in principle, ignores important factors, or is manifestly excessive; Sentencing consistency – requirement to align with sentences in similar cases; Constitutional primacy over community norms where child protection is engaged.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
The court upheld the appellant's plea-bargain sentence, finding no miscarriage of justice or manifest excess.
Criminal procedure – Plea bargaining – regulated by the Judicature (Plea Bargain) Rules, 2016; court’s supervisory role and power to reject agreements that may occasion miscarriage of justice. Sentencing – limited discretion where sentences arise from plea bargains; appellate interference only where illegal, based on wrong principle, failing to consider material circumstances, or manifestly excessive. Remand – deduction of time spent on remand properly applied to sentence.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Conviction for aggravated robbery upheld on recent possession; sentence reduced from 38 years to effective 20 years due to mitigation.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – Circumstantial evidence and doctrine of recent possession; contradictions in witness testimony – distinction between material and minor (typographical) inconsistencies; sentencing – appellate intervention where sentence is manifestly excessive; duty to consider mitigating factors and consistency of sentences.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Circumstantial and 'last seen' evidence sustained the appellant's murder conviction; sentence reduced to 27 years with remand credit.
Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Necessity to exclude co-existing circumstances and produce moral certainty; contradictions – material versus peripheral; 'last seen' doctrine – inference where accused was last with victim; accused's silence and failure to explain; sentencing – appellate interference, remand credit under Article 23(8), parity and consistency in murder sentences.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Convictions upheld on corroborative circumstantial evidence despite expunged confessions; sentences reduced for appellants' youth.
Criminal law – aggravated robbery; Evidence – retracted/repudiated charge and caution statements; irregularity where same officer records multiple confessions; circumstantial and corroborative evidence; admissibility and delay in recording statements; sentencing – consideration of youthful age and mitigation; appellate re‑appraisal of facts and sentence adjustment.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Appellant's poisoning conviction on circumstantial and toxicological evidence upheld; life sentence reduced to 22 years 8 months.
Criminal law – murder by poisoning – circumstantial evidence – sufficiency and requirement to exclude co‑existing circumstances; evidence of motive and forensic toxicology; chain of custody and fabrication not raised at trial; sentencing – appellate re‑assessment, failure to consider mitigation/aggravation, reduction of life sentence to fixed term with remand credit.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Appellate court dismissed challenge to a 20-year sentence for aggravated robbery involving firearms as not manifestly excessive.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – Sentence review – Use of deadly weapon – Manifestly excessive – Sentencing consistency and guidelines – Appellate interference only where sentence illegal, based on wrong principle, or manifestly excessive.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Minor contradictions did not undermine identification; conviction and 26-year sentence for aggravated robbery were upheld.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – prior acquaintance identification at night – requirement to exercise caution; minor contradictions do not necessarily vitiate identification if satisfactorily explained or corroborated. Criminal procedure – Appellate re-appraisal – appellate court to re-evaluate evidence in first appeal and allow for not having seen witnesses. Sentencing – aggravated robbery – sentencing starting point and reduction for mitigating factors and remand time; interference only if illegal or manifestly excessive.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Circumstantial evidence of proximate threats and attempt established guilt; one co-accused’s sentence reduced on appeal.
Criminal law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence and threats – Proximity and coherence of threats/attempts establish transaction – Alibi defence and burden to rebut by prosecution – Assessors' opinions and duty to state reasons for departure – Sentencing: mitigation, remand credit and appellate re-sentencing.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Appellants' convictions for murder affirmed; trial court's failure to credit remand time rendered one sentence illegal and all sentences partly varied.
Criminal law – murder and attempted murder – identification evidence (familiarity, daylight, proximity, prompt ID) – dying declaration admissibility – doctrine of common intention – remand period mandatory in sentencing (Article 23(8)) – appellate resentencing for consistency and illegality of sentence omitting remand time.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
Appellate court upheld murder sentences as within range and not manifestly excessive.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Murder – Appellate interference only where sentence illegal, wrong in principle, important circumstances ignored, or manifestly excessive; mitigation, remand credit, parity and sentencing ranges considered.
|
11 February 2022 |
|
|
10 February 2022 |
|
Mortgagee’s failure to give required notices and irregular private sale justified compensation and damages; appeal dismissed.
Mortgagee duties – demand notice and notice of sale – sale by private treaty – sale at undervalue – valuation evidence and court's discretionary assessment – admissibility and weight of handwriting expert evidence proving forgery and non-service – awards of general, aggravated and exemplary damages – appellate restraint on interfering with discretionary valuations – costs against non-appealing third party.
|
10 February 2022 |
|
Appellant failed to prove meter fault or negligence; disconnection lawful and billing enforceable under the Water Act.
Water law – billing and disconnection – meter readings as basis for assessment; burden of proof and expert evidence; locus in quo discretionary in non‑land disputes; Water Act s.73 (repair after meter) and s.95 (disconnection for 30 days’ non‑payment).
|
10 February 2022 |
|
|
10 February 2022 |
|
|
10 February 2022 |
|
|
10 February 2022 |
|
Delay to communicate a statutory administrative decision is actionable but not amenable to substitutionary judicial review; pursue ordinary remedies.
Administrative law — Judicial review — Amenability of matter to judicial review — Where no administrative decision exists, delay/failure to communicate is a breach of statute actionable as tort or by mandamus, not by substitutionary judicial review; separation between public-law review and private-law employment remedies — UPDF Act s.66(2) — Time reckoning for judicial review applications (Rule 5 Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules).
|
8 February 2022 |
|
The applicant failed to show requisite grounds or imminent execution to justify an interim stay of execution in the Court of Appeal.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Requirements for interim stay: notice of appeal, pending substantive application, imminent threat of execution, and special circumstances. Civil procedure – Jurisdictional practice – Rule 42(1) requires applications capable of being brought in either court to be brought first in the High Court absent exceptional circumstances. Appeals – No automatic right of appeal from certain miscellaneous High Court orders; leave may be required.
|
8 February 2022 |
|
Interim stay refused where agency notice was already issued; applicant failed to show sufficient risk of irreparable loss.
Tax law — Interim stay of execution — Whether an interim stay should restrain collection after issuance of an agency notice — Effect of 30% deposit under Tax Appeals Tribunal Act — Status quo principle and irreparable harm — Refund provisions and whether appeal would be rendered nugatory.
|
1 February 2022 |
