Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

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
Visit website
http://www.judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/9/High
3 judgments
Advanced search

Court registries

All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
3 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 2013
Administrator-General v Nansubuga and 2 Others (Civil Suit No. 21 of 2003) [2013] UGHC 262 (18 September 2013)
Court nullified a fraudulent land transfer, ordering the reinstatement of the original owner and damages payment.
Land law – Fraudulent transfer of title – Limitation Act – Impeachment of title due to fraud.
 18 September 2013
Petronilla Omal Okoth v Godfrey Obbo Ondhoro and Gabriel Obbo Katandi (Miscellaneous Application 174 of 2013) [2013] UGHC 119 (17 September 2013)
Leave to amend plaint granted; transfer to magistrate’s court refused; limitation issue reserved for trial.
Civil procedure — Amendment of pleadings — O.6 r.19 CPR — amendment permissible to determine real questions in controversy; Transfer of suits — jurisdictional limits — High Court retains jurisdiction under Registration of Titles Act to cancel/alter title; Transfer refused where party seeks to reduce pecuniary value to oust jurisdiction; Limitation — preliminary objection reserved for main hearing where merits considered.
 17 September 2013
Insurance Company v Kasirye and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 358 of 2013) [2013] UGHC 255 (1 September 2013)
Taxation set aside where Taxing Master failed to apply Advocates' remuneration rules and made arbitrary, unsupported allowances to respondent.
Advocates' remuneration and taxation — Advocate/Client bill of costs — Sixth Schedule application — instruction fees, one‑third rule — apportionment of instruction fees where multiple counsel employed — necessity for particularisation and evidence for attendances/meetings — taxing officer must exercise discretion judicially; insufficient one‑line rulings and arbitrary allowances vitiate taxation.
 1 September 2013