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

Commercial Court of Uganda

The Commercial Court was established in 1996 as a division of the High Court of Uganda devoted to hearing and determining commercial disputes with current jurisdiction (as established under Legal Notice No.4 of 1996 and Instruction Circular No.1 of 1996); company causes, Bankruptcies and intellectual property.

The mission of the court is to deliver to the commercial community an efficient, expeditious and cost-effective mode of adjudicating disputes that affect directly and significantly the economic, commercial and financial life of Uganda.

Physical address
Plot 14, Lumumba Avenue, Nakasero.
Visit website
https://judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/17/Commercial%20Court%20Division.html
7 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
7 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
October 2005
D Namutebi and Anor v Kawempe Division (HCT-00-CC-CS 15 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 62 (19 October 2005)
Applicants entitled to Shs.2,000,000 monthly arrears for three years; earlier claims time barred, plus interest, damages and costs.
* Limitation – contractual claims against local authorities – three‑year limitation period and effect on instalment rent claims. * Contract formation and proof – documentary acknowledgement plus unchallenged oral evidence establishing agreed monthly remittance. * Remedies – assessment of arrears, interest, general damages and costs where defendant fails to rebut admitted documents.
 19 October 2005
Judith Abaho v SD Agri-Hitech (U) Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 70 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 63 (19 October 2005)
Claim for Shs.15,000,000 dismissed because plaintiff failed to prove a contract with the defendant company.
Civil procedure; contract – existence and proof of contract; burden of proof on balance of probabilities; inconsistency between pleadings and oral evidence; company liability versus individual liability; dismissal for failure to establish contractual cause of action.
 19 October 2005
In Re: Rankconsult (U) Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 695 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 61 (14 October 2005)
Applicant failed to show specific assets or duties warranting an interim liquidator; application dismissed with costs.
Companies law – Interim (provisional) liquidator – Section 238 Companies Act and Rule 27 – Applicant must show assets in jeopardy or public interest and must particularise property and duties sought – Unsupported, open‑ended investigations do not justify provisional appointment.
 14 October 2005
Surgipham Uganda Ltd v Noble Health Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS 595 of 2003) [2005] UGCommC 60 (13 October 2005)
Supplier recovered unpaid debt; managing director personally liable under guarantee; deposited drugs were security, not set-off.
Commercial law – Sale on credit – Dishonoured post-dated cheques – Security v. set-off – Mitigation of loss by sale of secured goods – Contractual penalty interest unconscionable; court reduces rate – Personal liability under shareholder’s guarantee – Proof of signature required for liability.
 13 October 2005
Peter Mulira v Mumtaz Kassam (HCT-00-CC-CS 307 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 59 (12 October 2005)
The applicant’s passing-off claim was dismissed as time-barred for lack of pleaded continuation.
Limitation of actions – Limitation Act s.3 – Passing off is a tort subject to six-year limitation – Continuing tort doctrine requires pleaded facts of continuity – Preliminary objection on limitation may be decided on pleadings when bar is apparent.
 12 October 2005
Haresh Dalwadi T/A Bugolobi Kobil Service Station v A A G and Sons Transporters Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 383 of 2003) [2005] UGCommC 58 (10 October 2005)
Failure to defend led to constructive admission; plaintiff awarded unpaid fuel debt, general damages, court interest and costs.
* Commercial law – debt for goods supplied on credit – proof by vouchers and financial statements; constructive admission where defendant fails to plead; assessment of special and general damages; refusal of contractual interest for lack of evidence; award of interest at court rate and costs.
 10 October 2005
British American Tobacco Uganda Ltd v Bamuda Tobacco Company Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 599 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 57 (4 October 2005)
Application for injunction dismissed: wrong statutory basis and no prima facie case or irreparable harm shown.
* Civil procedure – Temporary injunctions – Requirements: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience. * Order 37 CPR – Rule 1(a) applies to property in danger of waste, damage, alienation or sale; contract interference matters fall under Rule 2(1). * Injunctions – Illegality alone does not establish a prima facie civil case for interference with contracts; need identification of specific contracts and evidence of interference. * Evidence – General allegations (e.g., thousands of contracts) insufficient without naming affected parties or showing actual or threatened breaches.
 4 October 2005