High Court of Uganda

The High Court of Uganda is the third court of record in order of hierarchy and has unlimited original jurisdiction, which means that it can try any case of any value or crime of any magnitude. Appeals from all Magistrates Courts go to the High Court. 

The High Court is headed by the Honorable Principal Judge who is responsible for the administration of the court and has supervisory powers over Magistrate's courts. 

Physical address
Plot 2, the Square Kampala
18 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
18 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
April 1994
Criminal conviction quashed due to insufficient evidence proving intent to defraud under false pretences.
Criminal law - obtaining money by false pretences - distinction between civil and criminal wrongs - evaluation of evidence.
29 April 1994
Criminal law
29 April 1994
29 April 1994
Circumstantial evidence established unlawful killing, but intoxication and circumstances negated malice aforethought; convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to five years.
Criminal law – Homicide – Circumstantial evidence – proof of death and causation – identification of footwear; Self-defence – availability where accused was aggressor; Intoxication – relevance to malice aforethought; Murder reduced to manslaughter where intent not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
29 April 1994
25 April 1994
25 April 1994
The accused's accidental elbow strike caused death but s9(1) Penal Code exonerated the accused; he was acquitted.
Criminal law — Murder — Proof of death and causation without post-mortem; corroboration of child’s unsworn evidence; role of medical evidence; accident and non‑criminal responsibility under s.9(1) Penal Code.
25 April 1994
Self-defence failed; provocation reduced the killing to manslaughter; two-year sentence imposed.
Criminal law — Homicide — Self-defence — Proportionality of force; Provocation — Heat of passion reducing murder to manslaughter; Malice aforethought — inference from weapon and surrounding circumstances; Sentence — youth and time on remand.
22 April 1994
Court accepted guilty pleas to manslaughter and balanced deterrence against youth and remand time, imposing a short custodial sentence.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Plea of guilty and admitted facts – Sentencing discretion – Factors: deterrence, guilty plea, youth, first offender, remand custody.
21 April 1994
Accused convicted on plea of manslaughter and sentenced to 12 months considering provocation and two years remand.
Manslaughter – guilty plea accepted and conviction on plea; sentencing discretion – proportionality and mitigation; Provocation/home attack – mitigating factor; Remand custody – credit in sentencing; Use of weapon – necessity and relevance to sentence.
20 April 1994
Court inferred fatality from assault despite no post-mortem and sentenced the accused to time served for manslaughter.
Criminal law – Manslaughter plea accepted where State consents – Causation inferred from assault absent post-mortem when clinical signs and timing support lethal injury – Sentencing: discretion to impose time-served after prolonged remand and guilty plea.
19 April 1994
Accused convicted of manslaughter after guilty plea and sentenced to 3½ years, court weighing provocation, guilty plea, and remand time.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Plea of guilty accepted – Admitted facts and post-mortem establish fatal stab wound – Sentencing considerations: provocation/assault by deceased, guilty plea, and time on remand – Sentence: 3½ years’ imprisonment.
19 April 1994
Guilty plea to manslaughter accepted; balancing mitigation and aggravation, court imposed four years' imprisonment.
Criminal law – manslaughter accepted as lesser/congnate offence to murder – admissible inference of cause of death despite absent post‑mortem – sentencing: guilty plea and time on remand as mitigation; intoxication and brutality as aggravation; deterrence factor.
19 April 1994
19 April 1994
Consent judgment ordering defendant to pay plaintiff Shs.18,185,000 in 12 instalments with costs and default enforcement.
Civil procedure – Consent judgment – Judgment for monetary sum payable by instalments – Costs fixed and payable with first instalment – Default: execution and interest at court rates.
18 April 1994
Court held no valid customary marriage or proven paternity; Plot No. 61 belongs to deceased's estate and plaintiff granted administration and reliefs.
Customary law – marriage – Bakiga custom requires payment of agreed dowry for recognition of marriage; part-payment or a fine insufficient to constitute marriage. Civil burden of proof – paternity – plaintiff/claimant must prove paternity on balance of probabilities; inconclusive evidence fails. Land – unregistered customary interest – purchaser's estate retains interest until registration completed; municipal allocation while estate interest exists may be fraudulent. Probate – Letters of Administration – grant to family member with mandate where no opposing beneficiaries.
18 April 1994
13 April 1994
Plaintiff completed works; fraud unproven; defendant ordered to pay UGX 313,408; penalty clause held punitive.
Contract law – breach and completion of works; Evidence – parol evidence rule and s.91 EA proviso permitting oral proof of extension when written document silent; Fraud – allegation requires strict proof; Contractual charges – handling fees as legitimate practice; Penalty clause – distinction between liquidated damages and punitive penalties.
13 April 1994