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
8 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
8 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
February 2009
Bitangaro & Co. Advocates v Emmanuel Katto (Civil Suit No. 92 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 2 (25 February 2009)
A cheque issued by a third party cannot substitute for a pleaded retainer or taxed bill to found a solicitor’s claim.
Advocates’ fees – retainer required – bill of costs delivered and taxed or agreement for fixed fee necessary before suit; negotiable instrument – cheque by third party does not establish contract or cause of action against a non-party; Order 6 Rule 30 – striking out for failure to disclose cause of action.
 25 February 2009
Salini Construction S.P.A v Bisons Consult International (HCT-00-MA 88 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 44 (23 February 2009)
Consent orders are binding and will not be varied for mere delay, failed negotiations, or financial hardship.
* Civil procedure – Consent orders – treated as fresh agreements – can only be varied for fraud, mistake, illegality, misapprehension or contrary to court policy. * Civil procedure – Review of consent order – failure of negotiations, delay or financial hardship alone do not justify variation. * Execution – Garnishee orders and security – court will protect a judgment creditor’s security absent exceptional circumstances. * Exercise of discretion – inherent powers invoked only to prevent denial of rights or injustice.
 23 February 2009
Barclays Bank (U) Ltd v Global Supplies Ltd & 3 Ors (Civil Suit No. 741 of 2004) [2009] UGCommC 24 (16 February 2009)
Bank entitled to recover mistakenly credited funds where recipient knowingly withdrew and used funds received under a forged instruction.
Banking law – mistaken credit and reversal; forgery of payment instruction; duty of care of bank to remitter versus duty of recipient to act in good faith; customer’s warranty of authority to use credited funds; lapsed guarantees; entitlement of bank to trace/recover mistakenly credited funds.
 16 February 2009
Kiyegga Henry v Ecumenical Church Loan Fund Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 386 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 16 (15 February 2009)
An objector who held possession and purchaser's interest at attachment was entitled to release from attachment despite title remaining in the judgment debtor's name.
* Civil procedure – Order 22 CPR – Objector application: requirement to prove interest and possession at the date of attachment; title disputes generally excluded from this inquiry. * Evidence – admissibility – hearsay from unnamed informants and unsworn statements inadmissible in objector proceedings. * Land law – registered title not conclusive in objector proceedings; possession and purchaser's interest may justify release from attachment.
 15 February 2009
Nyakato Josephine v Ecumenical Church Loan Fund Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 381 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 19 (15 February 2009)
Applicant proved ownership and possession; property removed from attachment for failure to show it was held for the judgment debtor.
Civil Procedure — Objector proceedings (Order 22 Rules 55–58) — Attachment of property — Interest and possession at date of attachment — Burden of proof — Whether property held on own account or in trust for judgment debtor — Relief: removal from attachment and costs.
 15 February 2009
Francis Brake Lubega v Barnabas Taremwa (HCT-00-CC-MA 421 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 52 (4 February 2009)
Procedural mis‑citation of the rule to amend pleadings may be overlooked if the correct procedure was used and no injustice results.
Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Mis‑citation of procedural rule (Order 6 r.18 v r.19) – Chamber Summons proper procedure – Article 126(2)(e) permits overlooking technical defects where no injustice results.
 4 February 2009
Kibuuka Musoke v Tour & Travel Centre Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 603 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 18 (4 February 2009)
Plaintiff to a counterclaim cannot replace mortgaged title with bank guarantee; deposit is not payment into court.
Civil procedure – Order 27 R.1 and R.9 – payment into court versus deposit of security; Plaintiff as defendant to counter-claim; substitution of mortgage security; court's power to cure procedural irregularities; prejudice from time-limited bank guarantees.
 4 February 2009
Peter Muramira v Brian Kaggwa (Civil Suit No. 64 of 2008) [2009] UGCommC 6 (3 February 2009)
Purchaser entitled to refund of deposit with interest and costs where seller failed to enable completion and resold the property.
Contract law – sale agreement – purchaser entitled to refund of deposit where seller fails to procure mortgage discharge and resells property; interest and costs awarded.
 3 February 2009