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
5 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
5 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
August 2005
BM Steel Ltd v Kilembe Mines Ltd Ruling 3 (HCT-CC-00-MA 579 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 48 (31 August 2005)
An order setting aside an arbitral award is not appealable under the Civil Procedure Act and no leave lies under the Rules.
Appealability — order setting aside arbitral award — Section 77 Civil Procedure Act excludes such orders; Order XL Rules cannot confer leave for orders not made under Rules; arbitration matters governed by Arbitration and Conciliation Act; authority: Rene Dol; B.D. Bilmoria.
 31 August 2005
C H Sonpal v East African General Insurance Co Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-MA 420 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 49 (31 August 2005)
Applicant shareholder granted joinder to challenge company conversion; non-parties may apply for joinder.
Civil procedure – Joinder of parties under Order 1 Rule 10(2); locus standi of non-parties; proprietary interest shown by share certificate; avoiding multiplicity of proceedings; challenge to company conversion from public to private.
 31 August 2005
In Re: Ranch on the Lake Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 537 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 47 (24 August 2005)
Application for leave to appeal dismissed as time‑barred under Rule 39(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
* Civil procedure – appeals – leave to appeal – Rule 39(2)(a) Court of Appeal Rules requires application for leave within 14 days or informally at time of decision. * Civil Procedure Act s.80 governs appeals as of right (30 days) and permits appellate court to extend time; not applicable to leave applications. * First instance court lacks jurisdiction to extend time for leave applications governed by Court of Appeal Rules. * Application for leave filed out of time is dismissible with costs.
 24 August 2005
Triad Holdings Ltd v Networks Exports Pvt Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-CS 358 of 2000) [2005] UGCommC 46 (19 August 2005)
Statutory pre‑shipment inspection requirements did not create contractual privity with inspectors; plaint struck out as disclosing no cause of action.
* Civil procedure – striking out plaint – Order 7 r 11(a) – plaint discloses no cause of action. * Contract law – privity – statutory inspection regime does not create contractual privity between importer and pre‑shipment inspectors. * Statutory/regulatory obligations – pre‑shipment inspection under Bank of Uganda regime – duties limited to quality/quantity and price comparison; remedies for breach likely in negligence/statutory duty. * Evidence – survey report attributing damage to containers and transit conditions, not to inspectors’ conduct.
 19 August 2005
Uganda Revenue Authority v Remigious Patrick Paul (HCT-00-CC-CA 8 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 45 (1 August 2005)
Forfeiture was unlawful because the Commissioner-General failed to identify an offence, follow statutory procedure, or ascertain value.
Customs law – forfeiture of goods – Section 132(4) does not create an offence – mandatory procedural requirements under Sections 159–162 and Section 174 – compounding offences – evidential burden and value ascertainment – unlawful forfeiture where statutory procedures not followed.
 1 August 2005