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
4 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
4 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
October 2012
Airtel Uganda Ltd v Commissioner General Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-00-CC-CS 457 of 2010) [2012] UGCommC 129 (18 October 2012)
Statutory penal interest under the VAT Act is payable despite no award by the Tax Appeals Tribunal or courts.
Tax law – VAT Act statutory penal interest (2% per month compounded) – payable notwithstanding Tax Appeals Tribunal or court silence; Tax Appeals Tribunal Act s.15 – "pay 30% pending appeal" does not exempt taxpayer from penal tax; penal tax treated as tax and assessed by Commissioner.
 18 October 2012
Kemigisha Mbabazi v Jing Cheng International Trading Ltd (HCT-00-CC-MA 344 of 2012) [2012] UGCommC 128 (17 October 2012)
Consent judgment upheld; arrest execution set aside for failure to serve mandatory notice to show cause.
Civil procedure – consent judgment recorded in court – binding if entered in presence of party and counsel; review only for fraud, collusion or material misapprehension; execution by arrest after 12 months requires notice to show cause under Order 22 r 19 and r 34; failure to serve notice renders arrest execution irregular; corporate veil arguments insufficient without proper lifting application.
 17 October 2012
International Investment House Company Llc & Anor v Nzeyi & 2 Ors (Miscellaneous Cause No. 11 of 2012) [2012] UGCommC 126 (5 October 2012)
Court allowed a limited injunction preserving shares paid for pending arbitration but declined to restrain the entire rights issue due to regulatory and factual changes.
Arbitration Act s.6 – interim measures pre-arbitration; interim injunction principles (prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience); conflict with banking regulator directives; preservation of shares purchased pending arbitration; limited court interference where recapitalisation and third-party interests exist.
 5 October 2012
Isingoma v MGS International (U) Ltd (HCT-00-CC-CS 652 of 2006) [2012] UGCommC 125 (1 October 2012)
The respondent lawfully terminated the applicant’s dealership for fuel dumping but used excessive force during eviction.
Contract — Dealership agreement — Clause permitting termination where dealer buys/sells competitor petroleum (dumping) — Onus and standard of proof (balance of probabilities) for alleged dumping; Evidence: delivery receipts, identification of delivery vehicle, prior warning. Contract — Termination procedure — Arbitration clause; improper use of force in taking possession. Damages — Special damages require strict proof; ledgers and post-facto audit weak for unpaid supply/loss-of-profit claims. Costs — Apportionment where successful party’s conduct in enforcement was reproachable.
 1 October 2012