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
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
8 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 2011
Castar Rags (U) Ltd v Riyaz Mithani (Civil Suit No. 371 of 2010) [2011] UGCommC 99 (22 September 2011)
Objection that plaintiff can't sue on a contract it did not sign was premature absent agreed facts or admitted documents.
Civil procedure — Preliminary objection — whether plaint discloses cause of action — Order 7 r.11; inadmissibility of documents not annexed to plaint — Order 7 r.14 and r.18; point of law premature where material facts or documents are disputed or not admitted; locus standi/party to contract — only parties can generally sue on contract; fiduciary duties/constructive trust and company’s remedies; procedural requirements for counterclaims and adding parties — Order 8.
 22 September 2011
Kampala Nissan v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2009) [2011] UGCommC 212 (22 September 2011)
A statutory tax authority cannot be estopped from imposing VAT; assessment remitted for factual reassessment of markups and VAT computation.
Tax — VAT on imports and in-bond sales — Whether departmental letter can waive statutory VAT obligation — Estoppel against statutory duty — Interpretation of VAT Act s.4 and s.23 — Reassessment and auditor remit for factual determination of markup.
 22 September 2011
Maersk Uganda Ltd v First Merchant International Ltd (Civil Suit No. 143 of 2009) [2011] UGCommC 98 (22 September 2011)
Defendant liable for US$63,787 on dishonoured cheques and ordered to return 43 containers with detinue damages and costs.
Bills of exchange/cheques – cheque dishonoured ("refer to drawer") – holder entitled to judgment absent exceptional grounds; cheque treated as cash. Detinue – owner’s right to immediate possession, identification of containers by serial numbers, damages for detention at agreed per‑day rate. Procedure – defendant absent/ex parte proceedings; counterclaim dismissed for want of prosecution.
 22 September 2011
Stanbic Bank (U) Limited & Another v The Commissioner General, Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application 42 of 2010) [2011] UGCommC 2002 (22 September 2011)

 

 22 September 2011
Hydro Engineering Services (U) Ltd v Thorne International Bioler Services Ltd (Civil Suit No. 594 of 2007) [2011] UGCommC 303 (21 September 2011)
The plaintiff’s monetary claim was barred by res judicata because it had been raised in earlier proceedings and is dismissed.
Res judicata – Section 7 Civil Procedure Act – Explanation 4 and Explanation 5 – former suit included the manpower/hire claim (exhibit P18 item 6) – relief not expressly granted deemed refused – subsequent suit dismissed with costs.
 21 September 2011
Heritage Oil & Gas Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal No. 14 of 2011) [2011] UGCommC 97 (12 September 2011)
Tribunal correctly refused to refer the applicant's tax dispute to arbitration; tax disputes are statutory and ACA applies to courts.
* Arbitration and Conciliation Act s.5 – applicability to courts (judges/magistrates) not specialist tribunals. * Tax law – tax liabilities and dispute resolution are statutory; cannot be ousted by contract. * Agency – Revenue Authority is a statutory agent of Government and may be bound by Government contracts. * Tribunal jurisdiction – Tax Appeals Tribunal lacks statutory power to refer its proceedings to arbitration under s.5 ACA.
 12 September 2011
Batanda v SDV Transami Uganda Limited (Civil Suit No. 0182 of 2010) [2011] UGCommC 2009 (8 September 2011)
The plaint was rejected for lacking a cause of action against the defendant; arbitral award already compensated plaintiff.
Contract Law – Employment Contracts – Breach of Contract – Doctrine of Double Recovery – Res Judicata – Arbitration Awards.
 8 September 2011
Western Uganda Cotton Co Ltd v Dr George Asaba & 3 Ors (Civil Suit No. 353 of 2009) [2011] UGCommC 107 (7 September 2011)
Whether non‑service of a counterclaim on non‑parties mandates dismissal, while non‑service on the plaintiff may be excused if no prejudice.
* Civil procedure – service of process – service of counterclaim – distinction between service on existing plaintiff and on new parties introduced by counterclaim; mandatory provisions of Order 5 r 1(2) and sanction in r 1(3). * Pleadings – Order 8 r 8 and r 19 – duty to deliver defence and serve counterclaim on plaintiff; Order 8 r 9 – service where counterclaim introduces non‑parties. * Interpretation – mandatory v. directory rules; limits on use of Article 126(2)(e) and inherent powers (s96, s98 CPA) to cure non‑service. * Relief – dismissal of counterclaim where mandatory service provisions are not complied with; leave to amend or withdraw to avoid multiplicity of suits.
 7 September 2011