|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2026 |
|
|
Default judgment set aside where service was not proved; applicant granted leave to file defence out of time.
Civil procedure — setting aside ex parte/default judgment — service on corporations — adequacy of electronic/WhatsApp service — Order 9 r12 & r27; Order 29; leave to file defence out of time — Order 51 r6.
|
11 February 2026 |
|
Owner who accepted non‑conforming goods and then changed specifications cannot rely on its own prevention to avoid payment.
Construction contract — supply-and-install composite contract; implied warranties as to materials and workmanship; deviation from specifications and ratification by acquiescence; acceptance under Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act (s.42–43); privity of contract; prevention principle — owner’s unilateral specification change and estoppel; conversion — restitution and damages.
|
10 February 2026 |
|
Court held caretaker failed to prove an oral reimbursement agreement and became a trespasser when he refused to vacate.
Land law – caretaker/licensee – oral contract and parole evidence – burden to prove reimbursement agreement; trespass for continued occupation after permission withdrawn; admissibility and weight of documentary evidence (receipts, registration of surveyor); mesne profits – need for evidence of profits earned.
|
10 February 2026 |
|
Buyer liable for unpaid delivered goods; counterclaim alleging procurement fraud dismissed for failure to prove fraud strictly.
Sale of Goods — delivery and acceptance evidenced by delivery notes and Goods Received Notes; fraud allegations require strict proof; counterfeit goods claim not sustained where buyer had reasonable opportunity to examine and did not reject; corporate veil not pierced absent evidence of sham; damages, interest and costs awarded to successful supplier.
|
9 February 2026 |
|
Ex parte judgment set aside where substituted service and corporate changes prevented defendant learning of proceedings.
Civil procedure — Review and setting aside ex parte judgment — Order 9 rules 12 & 27 — substituted service — sufficient cause — locus to apply — corporate deponents and affidavits.
|
9 February 2026 |
|
Plaintiff awarded purchase price, general damages and interest after court found defendant fraudulently sold the land.
Civil procedure; contract for sale of land; fraudulent sale and burden/standard of proof for fraud; money had and received; measure of damages for breach of land sale; interest and costs.
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Breach of an investment contract was established, but fraud claims and piercing the corporate veil were not proven.
Contract law – breach of investment agreement – proof on balance of probabilities in ex parte proceedings; Fraud allegations – higher civil standard of proof; Lifting corporate veil – requires evidence of directorship, fraud or impropriety; Remedies – repayment, general damages, interest and costs; Exemplary damages – not awarded absent oppressive or profit-driven conduct.
|
6 February 2026 |
| January 2026 |
|
|
A plaint discloses a cause of action where principals (registered proprietors) via power of attorney can sue for breaches by an agent.
Civil procedure – rejection of plaint (Order 7 r.11) – cause of action; Contract law – privity and agency; Power of Attorney – Registration of Titles Act; Evidence Act – Section 91 (extrinsic evidence) and Section 114 (estoppel) – locus standi of registered proprietors.
|
31 January 2026 |
|
Whether the High Court may stay enforcement of tax assessments that reapply a methodology invalidated by the Tax Appeals Tribunal.
Tax law – stay of enforcement of assessments – jurisdiction of High Court vs Tax Appeals Tribunal – administrative re‑litigation of rejected computation methodology (gaming tax and withholding tax) – irreparable harm and balance of convenience.
|
31 January 2026 |
|
Application for enlargement of time and leave to appeal dismissed for failure to show sufficient cause.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – enlargement of time – statutory time limits – sufficient cause required to extend time – failure to state reasons for delay results in dismissal.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Set-off and adverse inference for spoliation resolved competing claims over vehicle sales and parking fees, yielding a net judgment for the plaintiff.
Contract and quasi-contract – sale of vehicles and possession – valuation as evidence of price – set-off of mutual debts – spoliation of records and adverse inference – interest and costs.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
The plaint failed to disclose a cause of action against the applicant; the applicant was struck off the suit.
Civil procedure – Strike out – Order 7 Rule 11(a) – plaint must disclose cause of action – inquiry limited to plaint and annexures – regulator alleged liability by omission must be expressly pleaded.
|
29 January 2026 |
|
Discovery refused; consent execution precludes relevance of a statement of account and valuation was already filed on ECCMIS.
Civil procedure — Discovery — prerequisites: relevancy, possession/control, non-privilege, prior futile attempts; Execution by consent — consented figures render detailed statement of account immaterial; ECCMIS filing suffices for production; Order 22 r.38 applies to decree holders, not judgment debtors.
|
28 January 2026 |
|
Court granted injunction preventing respondent removing applicant’s telecom mast pending appeal due to regulatory obligations and irreparable harm.
Civil procedure – Temporary injunction pending appeal; ECCMIS filing and timeliness; res judicata; jurisdiction of Registrar to stay execution; Telecommunications law – UCC Regulations 2019 and Guidelines 2021; irreparable harm – license revocation, contractual breach, public service disruption; balance of convenience.
|
28 January 2026 |
|
Court set aside ex parte judgment, finding counsel's negligence constituted sufficient cause for the applicants.
Civil procedure – Setting aside ex parte decree – Order 9 r27 – "sufficient cause" includes advocate negligence; affidavit formalities and failure to attach order curable for substantive justice.
|
28 January 2026 |
|
High Court orders immediate audit under Supreme Court referral, overrules authentication objection, and sets 60‑day report deadline.
Company law; execution of appellate decree; trial by auditors under Judicature Act ss.27–28; authentication of company evidence; pending appeal not an automatic stay.
|
27 January 2026 |
|
Court granted extension to file amended plaint due to counsel's mistake, overruling objections and awarding costs to respondent.
Civil procedure — Extension of time to amend pleadings — Sufficient cause and discretion to extend time — Mistake or lapse of counsel — Pending interlocutory applications do not bar protective applications — Costs awarded to respondent.
|
27 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff proved delivery and debt; court awarded the full liquidated sum with interest and costs.
Civil procedure — set-off and counterclaim; liquidated sum — specific pleading and strict proof; proof of delivery — delivery notes, ledger reconciliation, emails; burden shifts to debtor to prove payment; interest and costs awarded.
|
27 January 2026 |
|
Court dismissed the applicant’s objection, finding the property in the judgment debtor’s possession and the alleged sale unproven.
Civil procedure – objector proceedings against attachment – primary inquiry is possession at date of attachment; burden on objector to prove legal or equitable interest; timing of post-judgment sale and lack of clear payment/mortgage evidence can render alleged sale ineffective to defeat execution; bank confirmation relevant where mortgaged property involved.
|
25 January 2026 |
|
Service at a company's registered office was effective; late ECCMIS filing did not justify setting aside the default judgment.
Civil procedure – Summary suits – Setting aside default judgment (Order 36 Rule 11) – Service on corporation (Order 29 Rule 2(b)) – Substituted service analogy – Electronic filing (ECCMIS) – time limits and competence of late filings – Good cause requirement.
|
25 January 2026 |
|
An MOU plus conduct created a binding contract; the plaintiff was awarded principal, general damages and interest.
Contract law – Memorandum of Understanding may be binding where it imposes payment obligations and parties’ conduct evidences acceptance; burden of proof in ex parte proceedings – plaintiff must prove debt on balance of probabilities; remedies – recovery of principal, general (pre‑judgment) damages and post‑judgment interest in commercial disputes.
|
24 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove a contract with the defendant due to past consideration and privity of contract.
Contract law – formation and consideration – past consideration; Privity of contract; Agency and corporate personality – employee v employer liability; Guaranteed investment contracts; Burden of proof in civil claims; Costs follow event.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
The court refused the applicant’s broad discovery request, finding prior-loan documents irrelevant and reconciliation matters for trial.
Civil procedure – Discovery/production of documents – Relevancy and materiality; possession; fishing expedition; Civil Procedure Act s.22(a) and Order 10 r.14 CPR – Discrepancies in documents resolvable at trial – Costs awarded to respondent.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
A claimed commission agreement was a concealed kickback, voidable for economic duress and unenforceable as against public policy.
Contract law – commission/brokerage agreements – effective (causal) cause; Economic duress – illegitimate coercive pressure; Illegality/ex turpi causa – unenforceability of bribe-tainted contracts; Evidence and pleadings – departure from pleadings and waiver by failure to object.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
Part payment revived the mortgage debt; applicant not entitled to judgment on admission due to a substantial triable issue.
Limitation Act (Cap. 290) – mortgage debts (s.18) – fresh accrual by acknowledgement/part payment (s.22(4)) – distinction between written acknowledgement (s.23) and part payment – judgment on admission (Order 13 r.6) requires a clear, unambiguous admission; payment as partial settlement raises triable issues.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Court refused to pierce the corporate veil absent evidence of sham or fraud, finding the application premature.
Company law – Lifting/piercing the corporate veil – Exceptional remedy – Requirement to prove control and impropriety or use of company as façade – Execution law – Piercing veil at execution stage only where no other means to realize judgment.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
A loan agreement with an unlicensed moneylender is illegal and unenforceable; the appellant’s appeal succeeds and trial orders are set aside.
Moneylenders Act — unlicensed moneylender — illegality of loan agreement — unenforceability (ex turpi causa) — appellate review of trial court findings on contract enforceability.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Contractor breached material and performance specifications; plaintiff awarded refund, consequential, general and exemplary damages.
Construction law — proprietary specifications binding; implied warranty of materials and workmanship; mandatory building code imputed as contract term; variations require documented agreement and consideration; restitution for advance payments; recoverability of foreseeable consequential losses; exemplary damages for reckless disregard of structural requirements; unpleaded set-off not entertained.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Property must be released from attachment where a third party had possession and registered title at attachment.
Execution – Attachment and sale – Objector proceedings – Possession and interest at date of attachment – Validity of pledge by non-owner – Application of Order 22 CPR and s.44 CPA.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
An application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed as premature because leave to appeal had not first been granted.
Civil Procedure – Appeals – Leave to appeal – Out of time applications – Order 44 Rules 1(1) and 1(2) CPR – Right of appeal is statutory – Application premature where leave to appeal not first obtained – Ntambara John v Rukiga SACCO.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
Applicant demonstrated triable issues about separate contracts and non‑completion, so unconditional leave to defend was granted.
Civil Procedure – Order 36 summary suit – leave to appear and defend – Kotecha test – bona fide defence or triable issue – separate contracts and completion certificates – admission of indebtedness insufficient on its own.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
The applicant succeeded in recovering a proven outstanding debt; the respondent guarantor held jointly and severally liable with interest and costs.
Contract law — Guarantees and suretyship; guarantor jointly and severally liable on principal's default — Burden of proof in debt claims: creditor’s prima facie case shifts evidential burden to debtor to prove payment — Proof by delivery notes, invoices and ledger; commercial interest award — Costs follow the event.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Court awarded lender Shs.67,191,759.09 with interest at capped 33.6% pa; guarantor jointly and severally liable.
Contract law – breach of loan agreement – guarantor liability – recovery of principal – court discretion under s.26(2) Civil Procedure Act to award interest – interest capped by Legal Notice No.21 of 2024 (Tier 4 microfinance/money lenders) – dismissal for failure to prosecute (Order 17 r.4).
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Claim for refund dismissed: sale recharacterised as a fraudulent loan and parent title extinguished by condominium conversion.
Contract law – Sale versus secured loan; misrepresentation and fraudulent inducement – parol evidence admissible to establish fraud; res extincta – conversion of parent title into condominium units extinguishes single-title saleability; evidence – credibility, corroboration, burden of proof in claims for money had and received.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Court reopened respondent’s case to admit English documents undermining his claim of illiteracy; costs to abide outcome.
Civil procedure — Re-opening of party’s case — Fresh evidence — Section 98 Civil Procedure Act; Section 37 Judicature Act — Tests for reopening: materiality, inability to obtain earlier, and potential to affect result — Supplementary affidavit served without leave — No prejudice — Evidence of literacy vs claim of illiteracy.
|
14 January 2026 |
|
Mortgagee complied with statutory sale requirements; mortgagors failed to prove bad faith or undervalue, debt and interest awarded.
Mortgage law – power of sale – compliance with Mortgage Act and Regulations – valuation within six months – forced/forced-sale value – public auction and advertisement – duty to obtain best price reasonably obtainable – burden on mortgagor to prove manifest error, bad faith or substantial injury – purchaser obtains good title except in fraud.
|
13 January 2026 |
|
Stay of execution denied: applicants delayed and failed to prove imminent execution or irreparable harm pending review.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution pending review — Order 22 r.26 and Order 43 r.4(3) — requirements: pending suit, no unreasonable delay, imminent execution, irreparable harm, security — delay and failure to prove imminent execution or irreparable harm defeat stay.
|
13 January 2026 |
|
Appeal partly allowed: attachment denied against second respondent for lack of evidence, first respondent ordered to furnish UGX 50,000,000 security.
Civil procedure — Attachment before judgment — Requires evidence defendant about to dispose of or remove assets or has left jurisdiction — Police or extrajudicial statements not conclusive for ownership — Security for costs as alternative relief — Time for appeal from registrar runs from availability of record — Grounds of motion must be discernible in Notice of Motion.
|
12 January 2026 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause to set aside a default judgment caused by counsel's filing error.
Civil Procedure — Setting aside default judgment — Order 36 Rules 3(2) & 11 — "sufficient cause" required — counsel's filing error/neglect not a registry/system error — ECCMIS and affidavit of service as determinative evidence — dismissal with costs; s98 inherent powers.
|
12 January 2026 |
|
Applicants’ bare denial and failure to file a draft defence failed to disclose a triable issue; summary judgment granted to respondent.
Civil procedure – summary procedure (Order 36) – Application for leave to appear and defend – requirement to show bona fide triable issue and normally attach intended defence – mere denial without particulars is insufficient – failure to attach draft defence fatal – summary judgment and costs awarded to plaintiff.
|
12 January 2026 |
|
A contractual moratorium does not postpone statutory VAT obligations; VAT accrues at the time of supply under the Act.
Tax Law – Value Added Tax – Time of supply – Accrual (invoice) basis as default – Cash basis exceptional (s25, s26(3)) – Periodic supplies treated as successive supplies (s14(2)(b)) – Private contractual moratorium does not postpone statutory VAT obligations – Private contracts cannot fetter public law obligations.
|
10 January 2026 |
|
Applicant granted leave to tax advocate-client bill after court found instructions existed and no misconduct proved.
Advocates Act s63 – Taxation of advocate-client bill; proof of instructions – advocate-client relationship; documentary evidence; refusal of leave only where advocate acted fraudulently or improperly; taxation by Taxing Officer.
|
8 January 2026 |
|
High Court held that challenges to a notice of appeal and failure to prosecute lie with the Court of Appeal, not the High Court.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Notice of appeal lodged — Failure to prosecute — Jurisdiction to strike out for want of prosecution lies with the Court of Appeal (Rule 82) — High Court cannot vacate stay where notice of appeal exists.
|
8 January 2026 |
|
Events after the performance date cannot frustrate a contract; vendor liable, refunds, and US$2,500/month liquidated damages awarded.
Contract law – frustration – event after performance due cannot frustrate contract; anticipatory repudiation – remedies; restitution of advance payments; enforceability of liquidated damages (US$2,500/month); interest and costs.
|
7 January 2026 |
|
Bank not liable where the plaintiff’s officer forged statements; no Quincecare duty triggered; suit dismissed.
Banking law – banker-customer duties to provide accurate statements; vicarious liability and personal liability of bank employees; Quincecare duty (bank on inquiry); forgery by customer’s agent; misnomer curable; corporations cannot recover emotional distress.
|
2 January 2026 |
