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
92 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
92 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2006
Court annulled a parliamentary election after finding organised violence, undue influence and use of state resources materially affected the result.
Election law – Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 – non-compliance with statutory provisions and principles – organised intimidation, violence and torture of voters – use of government resources for campaigning – election offences (organisation of violent groups, undue influence) – qualitative assessment and annulment of election.
31 December 2006
Leave to defend under Order 33 granted where disputed facts and alleged dishonesty require full hearing.
Civil procedure – Order 33 r.3–r.4 CPR – leave to appear and defend in summary suit – requirement to show bona fide triable issue of fact or law – distinction between liquidated demands and disputes requiring full evidence – order to file written statement of defence.
31 December 2006
Infants' purported transfers were invalid, title was void for fraud, and administrators' estate title must be registered instead.
* Land law – title disputes – alleged sale to minors – capacity to contract; forged/irregular transfers. * Bona fide purchaser doctrine – purchaser with notice; effect of fraud and guardian's lack of authority. * Probate/administration – administrators' rights to estate land; effect of Letters of Administration on competing claims. * Remedy – cancellation of invalid certificate of title; replacement registration and costs.
21 December 2006
The applicant failed to prove electoral malpractices; petition dismissed as irregularities did not materially affect the results.
* Electoral law – burden of proof – petitioner must prove irregularities and that they substantially affected results. * Evidence – weight and credibility – inconsistencies, absent witnesses and missing exhibits undermine allegations. * Election offences – alleged misuse of government resources, biased appointment of officials, ballot‑staffing, pre‑ticked booklets, tally‑centre tampering, intimidation and bribery require specific, corroborated proof. * Procedural — unsupported hearsay and unproduced exhibits cannot displace official tallies.
20 December 2006
Habeas corpus unnecessary once detainee is charged and remanded; alleged 48‑hour breach may give damages, but no costs awarded.
* Habeas corpus – production after return – writ rendered unnecessary where detainee was charged and remanded prior to hearing. * Constitutional right to be charged within 48 hours – alleged breach may give rise to damages but is not necessarily remedied by costs in habeas corpus proceedings. * Costs – discretionary where application becomes unnecessary and claimant does not pursue damages.
17 December 2006
Sitting judge awarded damages and injunction after newspaper allegations of bribery and forgery found defamatory and unproven.
* Defamation (libel) – allegations against a sitting judge – imputations of bribery and forgery; * Publication and tendency to lower reputation – serious criminal imputations inherently defamatory; * Proof and defence – defendant failed to substantiate allegations; * Remedies – award of general and aggravated damages, interest, costs and permanent injunction; * Procedure – substituted service, failure to file defence and interlocutory judgment followed by final judgment.
17 December 2006
Prosecution proved killing and malice, but circumstantial and hearsay links failed to exclude reasonable doubt, so accused acquitted.
Criminal law – Murder: elements (death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, participation); Circumstantial evidence – must exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; Hearsay/principal declarant unavailable – admissibility and caution; Forensic corroboration (firearm restoration) insufficient without reliable links; Standard of proof – benefit of doubt and acquittal where prosecution case has weak links.
10 December 2006
Review of interlocutory order striking out late affidavits dismissed for failure to meet statutory review grounds.
Civil procedure – Review under s.82 CPA and O.46 r.1 CPR – grounds required: new evidence, mistake apparent, or sufficient cause; Election petitions – pleadings and affidavits strictly regulated; Interlocutory/scheduling orders – review not to be used as substitute for appeal; Admission of late affidavits – discretionary and may prejudice expedition of petition.
5 December 2006
November 2006
Petition dismissed as a nullity for failure to serve statutory respondent despite proved voter deletions and disenfranchisement.
Electoral law – mandatory personal service of petition notice – non‑service renders petition a nullity; Voter registration – unlawful deletion of names without tribunals/hearing (audi alteram partem) – disenfranchisement; Polling irregularities – over‑voting and non‑declaration of polling station results; Standard of proof in election petitions – balance of probabilities but high degree of cogent evidence required; Remedy – dismissal and costs; referral to DPP for potential criminal conduct.
29 November 2006

 

23 November 2006
Conduct of the parties formed a partnership; defendant breached duties by withholding accounts and transferring partnership property.
Partnership Act – formation of partnership by conduct; equal capital contribution; partner's duty to render true accounts (s.31); partnership property (s.24); breach of partnership duties; remedies — account, repayment, damages, interest and dissolution (s.38(f)).
6 November 2006
Photographing the President without permission does not, by itself, constitute an offence under section 167(d) for breach of the peace.
Criminal law – Idle and disorderly persons (s.167(d), Penal Code) – Meaning of "breach of the peace" – Whether photographing public official without permission amounts to conduct likely to cause breach of the peace – Conviction in absence of facts disclosing the offence – Quashing of conviction on revision.
1 November 2006
October 2006
Widespread, organised intimidation and proven election offences by the respondent invalidated the parliamentary election result.
Election law — non‑compliance with Parliamentary Elections Act, 2005 — procedural irregularities at polling stations; Election law — organised intimidation and violence by candidate’s supporters — effect on free and fair election; Election offences — misuse of government vehicle for campaign, organising groups for use of force (s.24(b)), undue influence (s.80); Remedies — setting aside election, fresh poll, costs.
30 October 2006
Depositing the full decretal sum in court under a consent order stops accrual of further interest from the date of deposit.
Civil procedure – Interest on decretal sum – Stay of execution – Effect of depositing full decretal sum in court pending appeal – Whether interest continues to accrue after deposit in court under a consent order.
26 October 2006
Petitioner failed to prove noncompliance or bribery on a balance of probabilities; election upheld and petition dismissed.
Electoral law – election petition – burden and standard of proof (balance of probabilities) – voter register updating and display – inadmissibility of unauthenticated CLN9 lists and late affidavits – multiple registration/multiple voting allegations – bribery allegations require clear, corroborated proof – petition dismissed.
18 October 2006
Applicant failed to prove disqualification or that irregularities at certain polling stations affected the election result substantially.
Electoral law — nomination qualifications and resignation requirement (Article 80(4) / s.4(4) Parliamentary Elections Act) — applicability to 2006 elections; Electoral Commission duties — responsibility for cancelled or non‑submitted polling‑station results; Election petitions — standard and burden of proof (s.61(3)) — “substantial effect” test for non‑compliance; Ballot‑stuffing/over‑voting allegations — need for credible, consistent evidence.
13 October 2006
September 2006
Petitioner failed to prove electoral irregularities substantially affected the Pallisa parliamentary election; petition dismissed with costs.
Election law – Parliamentary Elections Act s.61(1) – burden and standard of proof in election petitions; non‑compliance with electoral laws – assessment whether non‑compliance substantially affected result (qualitative and quantitative test); allegations of bribery, intimidation, ballot‑stuffing and voter register defects – evaluation of hearsay, contradictions, failure to report and lack of corroboration; credibility of Returning Officer’s unchallenged evidence.
22 September 2006
The respondent is vicariously liable for its employee’s negligent driving; the applicant awarded substantial general and special damages.
Motor-vehicle collision — negligence of driver — vicarious liability of employer — assessment of witness credibility and police sketch — contributory negligence rejected — proof of special damages — general damages for permanent disability (60%).
20 September 2006
Election annulled due to proven bribery by the candidate and agents; procedural irregularities did not alter result substantially.
* Election law – Bribery (S.68 PEA) – candidate and agents liable where acts committed with candidate's knowledge or approval. * Procedure – Recount nullity where ballot boxes unsealed or tampered with; evidence from such recount excluded. * Electoral administration – duty to safely custody ballot boxes (S.52 PEA); failure condemned but must be shown to have substantially affected result (S.61 PEA). * Evidence – non-compliance must be shown on balance of probabilities to have substantially influenced result to set aside election.
15 September 2006
Election annulled where candidate personally committed illegal practices and his agents engaged in bribery and undue influence.
Local Government elections — admissibility of affidavits (illiterate jurat) — standard of proof (balance of probabilities; higher degree for criminal allegations) — agency in electoral offences — use of government facilities for campaigning (s.126 Local Government Act) — carrying arms at polling station and undue influence (Parliamentary Elections Act applied via s.172) — bribery by agents (s.147) — Electoral Commission duties: transparency and control of ballot materials — remedies: election annulled under s.139(c), fresh election ordered.
15 September 2006
Petition dismissed: most election irregularities unproven and petition invalid due to failure of mandatory personal service.
Election law — Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 — burden and standard of proof in election petitions; alleged non‑compliance, improper assistance, intimidation, armed presence, bribery — insufficiency of evidence and defective pleadings; mandatory service requirements for election petitions — failure to effect personal service and invalid substituted service renders petition a nullity.
15 September 2006
Petitioner failed to prove respondent lacked A‑level equivalence; election upheld, with investigation ordered into disputed diploma.
Electoral law – candidate qualifications – requirement of A‑level or equivalent – authenticity of educational certificates – burden of proof in election petitions – UNEB equivalence and investigatory standards.
13 September 2006
Petitioner failed to prove manipulation; recount confirmed declared polling-station results and petition was dismissed with costs.
Election law – challenge to polling-station results – allegations of manipulation of Declaration of Results forms, improper transport of ballot box and failure to recount – credibility of presiding officer and returning officer affidavits – recount confirming declared results – petition dismissed.
11 September 2006
A petitioner seeking recount or scrutiny must identify specific ballots objected to at the count; aggregate invalid-vote totals alone are insufficient.
• Electoral law – Parliamentary Elections Act s.47 – counting at polling station, declaration and recording of votes • Election petitions – scrutiny/recount – entitlement only for ballots disputed/ objected to at the count or identified with particulars • Procedure – Report Book and initialed ballot papers are primary evidence of objections and validity of votes • Civil procedure – no fishing expeditions; summons for inspection requires particulars under the Election Rules
5 September 2006
Court excluded late-filed affidavits, refused interlocutory appeal and recusal, and granted withdrawal with specified cost arrangements.
* Election law – Parliamentary Elections Act s.63 – requirement for expeditious determination of election petitions; interlocutory appeals discouraged when they delay trial. * Procedure – non-compliance with court-ordered timetable – affidavits served after prescribed time may be excluded absent an application for extension. * Judicial ethics – recusal – allegation of bias must be specific and substantiated; mere dissatisfaction or losing does not amount to bias. * Election petition procedure – withdrawal under Election Petition Rules (Rule 22(1)) and allocation of costs.
4 September 2006
August 2006
The applicant's application for certiorari was dismissed for procedural non-compliance and naming the wrong respondent.
* Judicial review – prerogative orders – leave to apply for certiorari and prohibition – interim occupation orders. * Civil procedure – mandatory procedural compliance – Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Rules of Court) Rule 3(2) (Statement requirement). * Administrative law – interdiction authority under Teaching Service Commission Rules – identification of ‘responsible officer’ and proper respondent. * Misjoinder / improper party – application dismissed for naming wrong respondent.
31 August 2006
False newspaper allegations of rebel collaboration and bomb-making were defamatory; plaintiff awarded shs.3,000,000/= plus interest and costs.
Defamation – imputations of criminality (rebellion, bomb-making, financing and training of rebels) – burden of proof and justification – falsehood defeats fair comment and qualified privilege – media responsibility when reporting arrests – damages assessment.
25 August 2006
Stay of execution refused where no appeal filed and admissions eliminate realistic prospect of success; decretal sum payable immediately.
Execution — stay or delay of execution — intent to appeal insufficient without provisional/filed memorandum of appeal; payment into court not a deposit suspending execution; admissions on record negate prospects of successful appeal.
21 August 2006
The applicant's election petition was dismissed for failing to file the mandatory Rule 4(8) affidavit and for an undated, invalid affidavit.
Local Government Act — application of Presidential/Parliamentary election rules; Rule 4(8) Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules — affidavit accompanying petition must be filed with petition; Rule 15 — affidavits as evidence do not substitute for Rule 4(8) affidavit; jurat formalities — place and date mandatory; undated affidavit a nullity; statutory filing time-limits strict; inability to cure by supplemental affidavit where jurat requirements and timing not met.
11 August 2006
July 2006
Application to reinstate dismissed election petition denied due to material falsehoods in affidavits and lack of sufficient cause.
Election petitions – setting aside dismissal for non-appearance – requirement to show sufficient cause; affidavits containing material falsehoods vitiate application; due diligence of litigant and advocate; inherent jurisdiction (s.98 CPA) and Article 126(2)(e) inapplicable where clear procedures exist; prior Registrar application not res judicata where Registrar lacked jurisdiction.
24 July 2006
Petitioner’s challenge succeeded: winner was unqualified and election set aside; fresh nomination and poll ordered.
• Election law – candidate qualification – effective resignation from public office – resignation must be to appointing authority; acceptance by unauthorized officer ineffective. • Leadership Code/IGG – IGG findings and recommendations to relevant authority require action; failure to act may render candidate disqualified. • Electoral Commission – statutory duty to examine written complaints and correct confirmed irregularities; failure to act is a breach of duty. • Electoral offences – circulation of defamatory material during campaign is an illegal practice under electoral law. • Remedies – election set aside where candidate not qualified and electoral offence proved; court declined to declare runner-up elected, ordered fresh poll.
19 July 2006
A statutory instrument enacted after retirement may govern pending pension claims, supported by Article 254 constitutional protection.
Pensions — Application of later-enacted statutory instrument (SI 80 of 2000) to earlier retirements; Retroactivity and pending claims; Constitutional guarantee of pension rights (Article 254) — enforceability; Use of subsequent law as guidance in ongoing litigation.
17 July 2006
An election petition founded on repealed or irrelevant statutes lacks jurisdiction and is incurably defective, warranting dismissal with costs.
* Election law – requirement that election petitions be founded on extant statutory provisions – jurisdictional basis not a mere technicality. * Civil procedure – incurable defect – petitions based on repealed or irrelevant statutes cannot be cured by amendment. * Constitutional law – Article 126(2)(e) (substantive justice) does not override need for legal foundation or confer jurisdiction. * Procedural law – parliamentary election rules do not apply to local government election petitions.
17 July 2006
Court held the plaintiffs were unlawfully terminated and awarded arrears, leave payments, severance, damages, interest and costs.
Employment law – wrongful/deminational termination of local government chiefs – entitlement to salary arrears, payment in lieu of leave, pension, unpaid leave allowance, severance, transport allowance, general damages and interest – costs awarded to successful plaintiffs.
14 July 2006
Registrar’s dismissal under O.15 r.6 was a nullity; suit reinstated and applicant denied costs for lack of diligence.
Civil procedure – dismissal for want of prosecution – Order 15 r.6 CPR – power to dismiss lies with the court on its own initiative – registrar’s endorsement based on defendant’s application under wrong rule is nullity – suit reinstated – costs denied for lack of diligence.
7 July 2006
June 2006
Application to re-admit dismissed appeal allowed, but costs awarded to respondent for appellant's lack of diligence.
Civil procedure – application to re‑admit dismissed appeal – alleged reallocation of file and failure to serve hearing notice – taxation and execution – adequacy of reply to affidavit – lack of diligence and costs.
30 June 2006
A plea of prior full-and-final compensation does not alone negate a negligence plaint's cause of action.
* Civil procedure — Preliminary objection — Whether a plaint discloses a cause of action — Court must consider the plaint alone and assume averments true. * Tort — Negligence — Allegations that a defendant’s driver caused injury by negligence sufficiently disclose a cause of action. * Defence of prior full-and-final compensation — Constitutes a defence for trial and does not automatically defeat a plaint on preliminary objection.
30 June 2006
The plaintiffs were unlawfully dismissed on 15 August 1996 and awarded arrears, one month’s pay in lieu of notice, interest and costs.
Employment law – wrongful dismissal – insufficiency of evidence for employer’s alleged notice – effect of unproduced document – company rules inapplicable if effective after termination – damages limited to arrears and contractual notice (or pay in lieu).
29 June 2006
Murder not proved for lack of malice; accused convicted of common assault and released as time served.
Criminal law – Murder – Elements of murder (death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, participation) – Proof of malice – Corroboration of extra-judicial statement – Alibi disproved by eyewitness and flight – Conviction reduced to common assault – Time-served release.
23 June 2006
Acquittal where dying declarations lacked satisfactory corroboration and prosecution failed to prove unlawful killing and participation.
* Criminal law – Murder – elements: death, unlawful killing, malice aforethought and perpetration – burden on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt. * Evidence – Dying declaration – admissibility where declarant later dies; such statements require caution and, generally, corroboration before supporting conviction. * Evidence – Reproduced police statement inadmissible/unreliable where original not produced. * Circumstantial inference – Flight or absence insufficient to prove guilt without corroboration.
23 June 2006
Carnal knowledge and lack of consent proved, but acquittal due to unsafe identification and unrebutted alibi.
Rape – elements: unlawful carnal knowledge and lack of consent proved; Identification – single identifying witness at night; Alibi – prosecution’s duty to disprove; Acquittal where participation not established.
23 June 2006
Prosecution failed to prove accuseds’ participation in murder; dying declarations and circumstantial evidence lacked satisfactory corroboration.
* Criminal law – Murder – Elements: death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, participation – burden of proof; * Dying declaration – need for caution and corroboration; * Circumstantial evidence – must exclude reasonable hypothesis of innocence; * Alibi – prosecution duty to disprove; * Identification in darkness – reliability issues.
20 June 2006
Contradictory eyewitnesses and an unrefuted alibi defeated proof of the accused's participation in a murder.
* Criminal law – Murder: elements to be proved – death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, and participation. * Evidence: eyewitness identification – effect of contradictions and contemporaneous police statements on credibility. * Defence – alibi: prosecution’s burden to disprove. * Medical evidence – post-mortem establishing fatal head injuries supporting malice aforethought.
20 June 2006
Defilement conviction upheld on medical evidence, prompt identification and corroborated extra‑judicial admission; five year sentence imposed.
Criminal law – Defilement (s.129 Penal Code) – Elements: age, sexual intercourse, identity – Medical evidence and immediate identification – Repudiated extra‑judicial confession admissible if corroborated – Alibi disproved by identification and arrest.
20 June 2006
Accused acquitted of aggravated robbery but convicted of simple robbery; deadly weapon not proved.
Criminal law – Robbery – Elements of aggravated robbery (theft, violence, deadly weapon, participation) – Identification and proof of deadly weapon – Alibi – Common intention – Conviction on lesser offence (simple robbery).
20 June 2006
Affidavit filed late under Rule 7 struck off; petition allowed and petitioner reinstated as candidate.
Elections – Election petitions – Rule 7 Elections Petitions (Appeals to the High Court from Commission) Rules – mandatory three-day filing requirement for Commission’s affidavit – late filing struck off; Extension of time – judicial discretion requires explanation for delay and consideration of prejudice; Article 126(2)(e) – cannot be used to override clear procedural time limits; Consequence – unopposed petition allowed and disqualification set aside.
16 June 2006
Appeal allowed: convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove trespass and trial court misdirected by shifting burden of proof.
* Criminal law – Criminal trespass (S.302(b) Penal Code Act) – Elements of offence – need to prove intent to intimidate/insult/annoy. * Evidence – burden of proof – accused not required to prove ownership; trial court misdirection in shifting burden. * Evidence – failure by prosecution to cross-examine accused – un-cross-examined evidence presumed accepted. * Civil v criminal – determination of bona fide occupation/ownership may be relevant in criminal trial when bearing on defence.
7 June 2006
The plaint was struck out and related execution proceedings declared nullities because the proper corporate defendant was omitted.
* Civil procedure – execution – validity of execution sale – private treaty sale reported though warrant required public auction. * Civil procedure – parties – necessity of suing the correct legal person where a company is the purchaser – omission of corporate defendant is fatal. * Civil procedure – service – defective affidavits of service undermining proceedings. * Property law – bona fide purchaser – competing claims and police detention pending resolution. * Remedies – striking out plaint and declaring subsequent steps nullities; costs ordered on each party.
6 June 2006
Lineal descendants entitled to letters of administration; stranger lacked locus to lodge caveat—caveat vacated, damages awarded.
Succession Act – entitlement to letters of administration – priority of lineal descendants; Caveat – locus to object to administration – stranger lacks standing; Remedies – vacatur of caveat, grant of letters of administration, general damages and costs.
1 June 2006
The applicant's petition to adopt her two minor relatives was granted after satisfying statutory requirements; guardianship order corrected to adoption.
Adoption law — compliance with ss.45–46 Children Act; welfare of the child paramount; probation officer recommendation; correction of erroneous guardianship order to adoption; registration and foreign affairs formalities; retention of Ugandan citizenship.
1 June 2006