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
126 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Topics
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
126 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
July 1994
No-case submission upheld due to contradictory witness accounts and lack of medical evidence; accused acquitted.
Criminal law – Defilement – Submission of no case to answer – Material contradictions in prosecution witnesses’ evidence; absence of medical evidence where desirable; acquittal under section 71(1) of TID.
7 July 1994
Whether an identification and a flawed parade established a prima facie case against the accused.
Criminal law – robbery – identification evidence; Identification parade – procedural safeguards and Ssentale rules; Prima facie case – requirement before calling accused to answer; Corroboration of visual identification; Reliability of witness under stress.
6 July 1994
Morals and traditional values|HR
5 July 1994
June 1994
Contradictions, missing witnesses and unreproduced exhibits made the prosecution evidence manifestly unreliable; accused acquitted.
Criminal law – Rape: elements – sexual intercourse and lack of consent; Evidence – credibility, contradictions, non-production of exhibits, failure to call material witnesses; Medical evidence – bruises insufficient to prove intercourse; Standard – manifestly unreliable evidence/no safe conviction.
30 June 1994
Accused convicted of manslaughter on his plea; court accepted mitigation and imposed imprisonment with remand credit.
Criminal law – Plea bargaining/plea to lesser charge – Acceptance of guilty plea to manslaughter where prosecution raises no objection and accused admits facts; sentencing – balancing gravity of causing death against mitigation (provocation, first offender, ill health, family responsibilities, credit for remand).
28 June 1994
Uncorroborated recovery and absent identification meant no prima facie case against the accused for aggravated robbery.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Aggravated robbery – Requirement of prima facie case before calling accused to answer – Bhatt test; identification evidence – where complainant did not know or see accused; recovery of stolen property – necessity to exhibit recovered items and produce competent witnesses (police) to prove recovery and chain of custody.
28 June 1994

 

22 June 1994

 

22 June 1994

 

21 June 1994
Accused acquitted of defilement because prosecution failed to prove the complainant was under the statutory age.
Criminal law – Defilement – Essential ingredient: age of complainant – Where prosecution fails to prove statutory age, no prima facie case established – No‑case‑to‑answer submission succeeds; amendment of indictment not decided at no‑case stage.
15 June 1994
Accused convicted of manslaughter; court credits remand time and personal mitigation when imposing sentence.
* Criminal law – Manslaughter – guilty plea accepted; sentencing principles – mitigation (voluntary surrender, remorse, first offender, dependents, ill‑health) – credit for time spent on remand.
15 June 1994
Court accepted guilty plea to manslaughter and imposed three years’ imprisonment, crediting remand and mitigating factors.
* Criminal law – Manslaughter – Plea to lesser offence accepted where accused admits causing death but denies intent to kill. * Sentencing – Mitigating factors: self‑reporting, guilty plea, extended remand, first‑offender status, serious illness (HIV/AIDS). * Sentencing – Remand time to run against imposed sentence.
15 June 1994
A newspaper’s false allegations that the applicant encouraged forest encroachment were defamatory and not protected by privilege.
* Defamation – publication of false allegations in newspaper headline and article; * Qualified privilege – not available where publisher and source lack duty or interest to publish to public at large; * Reckless publication – reckless disbelief or failure to verify can amount to malice; * Damages – substantial award for reputational injury.
14 June 1994
Newspaper article and cartoon defamed the plaintiff; editorial was fair comment; damages and costs awarded.
Defamation — capacity to bear defamatory meaning; reference to plaintiff; justification (truth) — burden and proof in libel; fair comment on public interest; qualified privilege — scope; corporate authority to sue — sole director's instruction sufficient.
10 June 1994

 

10 June 1994
Conviction quashed where theft of cash was unproven, unsworn statement unfairly criticised and sentence improperly imposed.
* Criminal law – theft – whether prosecution proved accused handled or converted complainant's money as charged – conviction cannot be founded on inference from sale of goods when charge alleges theft of cash. * Criminal procedure – unsworn statement – accused must not be penalised for electing to make an unsworn statement; trial court must not improperly discredit it. * Civil v criminal remedy – disputes over failed business ventures/debts are primarily civil matters and should not be enforced by criminal prosecution. * Sentencing – fine imposed without inquiry into means and used as compensation is improper; sentencing must be reasoned and within statutory limits (Magistrates Courts Act).
10 June 1994

 

6 June 1994
Oral amendment to add damages in a summary debt claim refused as it would change the suit’s character and prejudice defendant.
* Civil Procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Order 6 r 18 and r 30 – oral amendment at trial – interlocutory application by chamber summons. * Civil Procedure – Summary procedure – claim for liquidated sum – limitations on adding unpleaded damages. * Civil Procedure – Amendment refused where it changes character of action or causes prejudice/injustice to other party.
1 June 1994
May 1994
A handwriting expert’s report is inadmissible if it introduces unpleaded new facts and lacks established provenance, constituting hearsay.
* Civil procedure – Pleadings – Order 6 r.5/6 – new grounds or allegations: a party must plead material facts and annex supporting documents; unpleaded expert evidence may be excluded. * Evidence – Expert handwriting report – admissibility – provenance of questioned and specimen documents must be established; otherwise report risks being hearsay. * Counsel conduct – producing specimen documents to experts – counsel should testify or disqualify himself to prevent hearsay and unfair surprise. * Remedies – Preliminary objection upheld and costs ordered where procedural and evidential rules breached.
30 May 1994
Plaintiff entitled to return or current value of deposited beer crates and damages for defendant's breach of agency contract.
Contract law – agency/stockist agreement – deposit of empty beer crates – defendant’s failure to supply and retention of crates – breach of contract – measure of damages as difference in current and prior value – default judgment/assessment under Order 9 rule 6 CPR.
26 May 1994
Court holds widow entitled to estate over father's objection, upholding both customary and Islamic marriages.
Family Law – Administration of Estates – Widow’s entitlement to letters of administration – Validity of customary and Islamic marriages.
25 May 1994
Accused convicted of defiling two children; police confession excluded but child testimony and corroboration proved guilt.
Criminal law – Defilement – Elements: victim under 18 and unlawful sexual intercourse; Evidence – admissibility of cautioned/confession statements; Evidence – weight and reliability of medical reports; Evidence of children and corroboration – unsworn child statements, competency, and independent corroboration; Alibi – evidential burden and assessment of credibility.
25 May 1994

 

18 May 1994
Civil Procedure
17 May 1994

 

9 May 1994

 

9 May 1994
No-case submission upheld where prosecution failed to prove theft and to adequately identify the accused for aggravated robbery.
Criminal law – No case to answer – Sufficiency of evidence – Elements of aggravated robbery – theft as material ingredient – Identification evidence – Conflicting witness accounts – Application of Bhatt v R.
4 May 1994
Unlawful killing proved on circumstantial evidence; malice aforethought not established, convicted of manslaughter.
* Criminal law – Homicide – Distinction between suicide and unlawful killing; admissibility and weight of circumstantial evidence. * Circumstantial evidence – Inference of guilt only where alternative hypotheses excluded. * Mens rea – Malice aforethought must be proved; provocation, intoxication and self‑defence may negate malice. * Offence – Where malice not established, unlawful killing may amount to manslaughter (s.182 Penal Code Act).
3 May 1994

 

2 May 1994

 

2 May 1994
Court appointed the mother guardian and authorized sale of part of jointly-owned land for the infants’ welfare.
* Guardianship – Jurisdiction under section 9(a) Judicature Act – appointment and control of guardians and infants’ estates. * Welfare of the infant – paramount consideration in guardianship appointments. * Sale of infant’s interest in land – court authorization where reinvestment benefits the children. * Consent of co-registered proprietor – evidential weight in guardianship and disposal applications.
1 May 1994
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

 

25 April 1994

 

25 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
March 1994
Advanced age (68) held to be an "exceptional circumstance" under section 14A, bail granted with bonds and reporting conditions.
Bail — Section 14A Trial on Indictments Decree — exceptional circumstances required for offences triable only by High Court — "advanced age" qualifies as exceptional circumstance — proof of age (medical report, charge sheet) — requirement to satisfy court applicant will not abscond — sureties and reporting conditions.
21 March 1994
Advanced age (68) held to be an "exceptional circumstance" under section 14A(1), bail granted with conditions.
Criminal procedure – Bail under section 14A(1) Trial on Indictments Decree – "Exceptional circumstances" – advanced age – proof of age by charge sheet and medical report – requirement to show non‑absconding – bail conditions imposed.
21 March 1994
Plaintiff entitled to constitutional compensation for developments despite Chief Conservator’s degazettement irregularity.
* Forestry law – distinction between central and local forest reserves – Chief Conservator’s authority to release central reserve land. * Administrative irregularity – failure to exclude/degazette parcel is irregular but not necessarily fatal to title absent fraud. * Constitutional compensation – Article 13 entitlement to adequate compensation for compulsory acquisition; pleadings limit admissible valuation. * Evidence – claims not specifically pleaded or strictly proved are rejected.
11 March 1994
Bail refused under s14A despite long remand because sureties were inadequate and applicants had previously jumped bail.
* Criminal procedure – Bail under section 14A of the Trial on Indictments Decree – prolonged remand (15 months) as exceptional circumstance; * Sufficiency and number of sureties – adequacy relative to number of accused and seriousness of charge; * Prior bail-jumping – relevance to risk of absconding and discretionary refusal of bail; * Court’s discretion – balancing prolonged remand against risk of non‑appearance.
11 March 1994
Defective particulars and an equivocal plea rendered the conviction for driving without third‑party insurance a nullity; conviction quashed.
Criminal law – defective particulars of offence – need to state day, time and place with reasonable clearness (Magistrates' Court Act s36(g)); statutory requirement for third‑party insurance (Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third Party Risks) Statute s2(1)); equivocal plea – where reply is not a clear plea of guilty the magistrate must record not guilty; combined effect of bad charge and equivocal plea renders proceedings a nullity; appellate revisionary powers (Criminal Procedure Code s341(1)).
11 March 1994

 

9 March 1994
The plaintiff’s registered title prevailed; trespassers ordered evicted and plaintiff awarded damages and costs.
Land law – Registered title – Certificate of Title conclusive (s.56 Registration of Titles Act); Trespass – cultivation and occupation of registered land; Remedies – eviction (vacant possession), general damages, interest and costs; Default proceedings – leave to proceed under Order 9 r.8.
2 March 1994

 

1 March 1994
February 1994

 

25 February 1994