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
6 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
6 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 2019
Uganda Authority v Dott Services (Ltd) & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 343 of 2019) [2019] UGCommC 31 (27 September 2019)
Applicant granted extension and leave to amend plaint to reinstate fraud particulars after documents were discovered, subject to costs and timetables.
Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Enlargement of time to seek leave to amend after Scheduling Conference – Newly discovered documents in applicant’s archives – Order 6 r 19 CPR; Abuse of process – Reinstating fraud particulars – bona fides and prejudice; Costs and procedural conditions to mitigate prejudice.
 27 September 2019
Fountain Publishers v Nantamu & Anor (Arbitration Cause No. 1 of 2011) [2019] UGCommC 30 (25 September 2019)
Court limited to statutory arbitration remedies; late award alone is not reviewable and repetitive applications are abuse of process.
Arbitration — limited court intervention — Arbitration and Conciliation Act sections 9, 31, 33, 34 — delay in award delivery not automatically vitiating — proper remedy to challenge award is section 34 setting aside — abuse of process for successive time‑barred applications.
 25 September 2019
Fang Min v Uganda HuiNeng Mining Ltd (Nominal Defendant) & 5 Ors (Civil Suit No. 318 of 2016) [2019] UGCommC 29 (19 September 2019)
Transfers of a company's exploration licence were void for lack of quorum/notice; conduct amounted to fraud on the minority and veil was lifted.
Company law – derivative action – fraud on the minority – reflective loss and standing to sue. Company law – meetings and resolutions – quorum, notice and validity of directors' decisions. Directors' duties – duty to act in good faith, avoid conflicts and statutory compliance; breach and remedies. Corporate personality – lifting the corporate veil where corporate form used as cloak for fraud; group control. Remedies – declarations nullifying transfers, audit of accounts, return/benefit to nominal company, interest and costs.
 19 September 2019
Hallmark Enterprises friends SACCO Ltd v Kwesiga (HCCS 657 of 2017) [2019] UGCommC 28 (17 September 2019)
Whether a default judgment on a liquidated loan claim must follow Order IX r6 and the appropriate award of principal, interest and damages.
Civil procedure – default judgment on liquidated demand – Order IX r6 applies, not Order IX r8; Proof of indebtedness – correspondence and acknowledgments; Damages – requirement of evidence to establish general damages; Interest – court’s discretion to moderate contractual/claimed rate; Costs – plaintiff entitled to costs where judgment entered.
 17 September 2019
Byaruhanga v Kanyeihamba (Miscellaneous Application No. 465 of 2017) [2019] UGCommC 24 (3 September 2019)
Application to set aside default judgment dismissed after court struck off affidavits for deliberate falsehoods, awarding costs to respondent.
Civil procedure – setting aside default judgment – requirement of bona fide defence and credible excuse for delay; affidavits – material falsehoods and inconsistencies – striking off affidavits – dismissal of application; costs awarded.
 3 September 2019
Trust Ventures Ltd v Powerfoam (U) Ltd (Civil Suit No. 669 of 2017) [2019] UGCommC 25 (3 September 2019)
A corporate plaintiff’s name misnomer was curable; suit proceeds after amendment where registry records and admissions establish identity.
Company law – corporate name variation / misnomer – whether plaintiff is a nonexistent entity – Order 1 Rule 10 CPR – curable misnomer where incorporation records and defendant’s admissions establish identity – amendment of plaint ordered.
 3 September 2019