|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| August 2022 |
|
|
Court found breach and guarantor liability; awarded UGX 318,993,500 special damages, UGX 25,000,000 general damages, interest and costs.
Contract law – breach of MOU and commitment agreements; guarantor liability under contractual guarantees; evidentiary burden in default judgment proceedings; partial allowance where bank statements and beneficiary lists conflict; proof of special damages for title/transaction costs; interest and costs awarded.
|
31 August 2022 |
|
The mortgagor's failure to repay after notice justified foreclosure, eviction, inspection access, sale and costs in favour of the mortgagee.
Mortgage law – foreclosure – remedy available on mortgagor's default; Order 37 Rule 4 CPR. Mortgage Act – remedies on default: possession, entry, valuation, sale (ss. 8, 19, 20). Civil procedure – ex parte proceedings after service by publication and failure to file defence. Costs – discretion under Civil Procedure Act; costs follow the event.
|
30 August 2022 |
|
The applicant mortgagee entitled to foreclose, enter, evict, inspect and sell property after respondent's default.
Mortgage law – remedies on default – foreclosure, possession, valuation and sale by mortgagee under Mortgage Act 2009 and Order 37 Rule 4 CPR; default and unopposed evidence; costs follow the event.
|
30 August 2022 |
|
A stay of execution of an arbitral award requires proof of substantial loss, prompt application and security; absence warrants dismissal.
Arbitration enforcement – stay of execution – Order 43 r 4(3) CPR – conditions for stay: substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, security for due performance – failure to prove any condition results in dismissal.
|
29 August 2022 |
|
Loan formed by multiple documents and conduct was enforceable; defendant liable for USD 37,143, insurer and employer not liable.
Contract formation – loan agreements may be constituted by multiple writings and conduct; written terms need not appear in a single document. Loan enforceability – borrower’s acknowledgement and receipt of funds supports contract existence. Insurance – scope and exclusions of credit life policies determine insurer liability for loan repayment. Employer undertaking – recommendation/undertaking letters do not necessarily transfer repayment liability. Remedies – court may award interest and costs; rate may be adjusted for conduct of parties.
|
29 August 2022 |
|
Plaintiff bank awarded outstanding loan, interest, general damages and costs after defendants defaulted and mortgaged property was sold.
Commercial law – Loan agreements – Default and enforcement; Security – personal guarantee, charges and mortgage; Mortgage sale proceeds applied to loan account; Burden of proof where defendant fails to file defence; Remedies – recovery of principal, contractual interest, general damages, interest on damages and costs.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
Whether respondents committed fraud and veil lifting warranted; court found no fraud but awarded USD 500,000 to the applicant.
Company law – lifting corporate veil – whether fraud proven to justify piercing corporate veil. Contract law – investment proposal/non‑binding proposals – when proposal becomes binding and divisibility of contract price. Remedies – recovery of money had and received, general damages, interest and costs. Evidence – fraud requires strict proof on a higher standard.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
The plaintiff was entitled to 40% project commission where a partner bound the firm by apparent authority.
Partnership law; agency and apparent authority of partners; consent judgment and effect on co-partners; validity and enforceability of KPI/consultancy agreements; procuring-cause test for commissions; contingent liabilities, retirement of partner and indemnity/contribution; commercial interest on withheld payments.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
Partner-executed KPI bound the firm; employee procuring the project entitled to 40% of net project profits.
Partnership law – apparent and implied authority of partners; ordinary course of business – when partner’s acts bind partnership; KPI/employment arrangements – commission entitlement; procuring cause doctrine – entitlement to commission; consent judgment – binding only on signing partner when not in firm name; indemnity/contribution among partners – liability for debts incurred while partner.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
Fraud not proved and corporate veil not pierced, but plaintiffs recover USD 500,000 and damages for breached investment obligations.
Civil law – Alleged fraudulent misrepresentation – requirement to prove fraud strictly; burden on claimant. Company law – Piercing the corporate veil – factors for lifting: fraud, sham, siphoning; court refused to lift veil. Contract law – Non-binding investment proposal rendered binding by parties' conduct; divisible contract and recovery of money had and received. Remedies – Recovery of funds, interest, general damages, and costs (split award).
|
16 August 2022 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove credit sales or indebtedness for goods; claim for UGX 290,937,000 dismissed with costs.
Contract law – breach of contract – requirement to prove existence of a contract and specific transactions for sale of goods.* Evidence – civil burden of proof – plaintiff must produce primary documentary evidence (tax invoices, accounting records) to establish indebtedness; cannot shift burden to defendant to prove payment.* Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act – ascertainment of goods and transfer of property.* Documentary authenticity – unauthenticated extracts (e.g., VAT claims) insufficient without supporting witnesses.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
|
10 August 2022 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's company name or logo infringed its registered INTEL trademarks; suit dismissed with costs.
Trademarks — infringement — elements: mark similarity, use in course of trade, likelihood of confusion; distinction between company name registration and trademark rights; burden of proof on trademark owner.
|
9 August 2022 |
|
Court ordered production of specified bank statements and emails, finding relevance, possession, and no established privilege.
Civil procedure – Discovery – Order 10 rule 12 – Prima facie basis sufficient for discovery; affidavit not always required. Evidence (Bankers’ Books) Act – bank account entries admissible and producible by court order for inspection and certified copies. Advocate-client privilege – protection limited to confidential legal advice; copying to third parties may negate privilege. Discovery – not a fishing expedition; must be relevant, material, proportionate and within party’s possession, custody or control. Joinder – interlocutory joinder of parties necessary where their presence is required to adjudicate discovery issues.
|
9 August 2022 |
|
Court ordered bank to produce specified bank statements and emails, finding them relevant, non‑privileged and within bank’s control.
Discovery — Order 10 r 12 CPR — Bankers' Books Act — inspection and certified copies of bank statements; relevance and materiality; advocate–client privilege; possession, custody or control; protection against fishing expeditions; discretionary relief; production timelines.
|
9 August 2022 |
|
An order for accounts requires a pleaded right to rendition and absence of preliminary issues; auditor appointment is premature.
Civil procedure – Order 20 r.1 – requirements for suit for rendition of accounts – plaint must pray for account or relief must necessarily involve taking an account; Banking law – bank–customer relationship ordinarily debtor–creditor, not fiduciary; Preliminary questions – questions of law or mixed law and fact may preclude immediate account order; Court-appointed experts/auditors – discretionary, exceptional and usually after party experts adduce evidence.
|
8 August 2022 |
