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
17 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
17 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 2019
A beneficiary whose parent died before distribution has locus standi; administrators’ unauthorized sales breach fiduciary duty and are recoverable from knowing purchasers.
Succession law – locus standi of beneficiaries – section 191 procedural not jurisdictional; Fiduciary duties of administrators – duty of loyalty and care; Disposal of estate property without beneficiaries’ consent – breach of duty; Third-party liability – knowing participation/constructive notice; Tracing and proprietary remedies to recover estate property; Trespass by encroaching fence; Limitation – six-year period runs when beneficiary’s interest vests.
26 September 2019
Where statutory planning appeals exist, parties must exhaust them before subordinate courts; failure to do so bars judicial review.
Administrative law – Physical Planning Act, 2010 – statutory internal appeal hierarchy – exhaustion of administrative remedies – ouster of subordinate civil court jurisdiction in planning disputes – exceptions (fundamental rights, natural justice, lack of jurisdiction) – jurisdiction to hear private law claims.
26 September 2019
Whether a title over land offered after an expired lease is vitiated by illegality and legitimate expectation.
Land law – expiry of lease and holding over; legitimate expectation and equitable interest; locus in quo inspections discretionary; title vitiated by illegality; duty to hear sitting occupants before alienation.
26 September 2019
Conviction for stealing a vehicle by conversion upheld; evidential burden to prove authority lay on appellant; sentence reduced for remand.
* Criminal law – Stealing a motor vehicle – offence may be committed by conversion where a person with lawful access disposes of vehicle without authority. * Evidence – Burden of proof – evidential burden on accused to raise defence of authority/permission; persuasive burden remains with prosecution. * Sentencing – discretionary exercise; remand period must be taken into account; appellate interference only if illegal, wrong principle, material factor ignored, or manifestly excessive. * Compensation – Section 197 Magistrates Courts Act – summary compensatory orders permissible but must be evidence-based, reasonable and accompanied by reasons.
26 September 2019
Appeal dismissed where locus in quo and corroborative evidence supported respondents' ownership and no miscarriage of justice occurred.
Land law – ownership and possession – conflicting oral testimony – role of locus in quo and corroborative physical evidence; Title evidence – expired lease as prima facie evidence of customary ownership; Civil procedure – appellate scrutiny of findings of fact; Evidence Act s.166 – improper admission may be disregarded if decision justified on other evidence.
26 September 2019

 

24 September 2019
Physical features at the locus in quo prevail for boundary determination; sketch maps are demonstrative and procedural irregularities harmless absent miscarriage.
Land law – locus in quo and sketch maps: demonstrative evidence only; Evidence – improper admission at locus in quo may be disregarded if harmless (s.166 Evidence Act); Civil procedure – procedural defects ("Draft Memorandum") may be cured in the interest of justice and pleadings may be amended to determine real questions in controversy; Boundary disputes – physical features on inspection prevail over inconsistent verbal descriptions; Trespass – possession by inheritance and trespass proved by respondent.
12 September 2019
Appellant proved customary/user rights and trespass; locus in quo irregularity non-fatal — appeal allowed and remedies granted.
Land law — Customary communal tenure vs limited private user-rights; locus in quo procedure — evidence recording requirements; cause of action for recovery of land and trespass; proof of conversion of communal land and community regulation; remedies: declaration, vacant possession, injunction, damages.
12 September 2019
Acholi customary intestacy and lack of sub-county title defeat purchasers' claims; appeal dismissed and costs awarded.
Evidence — judicial notice — courts may take judicial notice of customary practices; Limitation — recovery of land — 12-year period and adverse possession; Customary law — Acholi intestacy: re-allotment/user rights, not absolute alienation; Land law — nemo dat quod non habet — sub-county without title cannot transfer land; Purchasers of unregistered land — constructive notice and duty of due diligence.
12 September 2019
A private mediated boundary settlement can bind parties and their privies and preclude subsequent land claims.
Land law - locus in quo procedure — witnesses must be sworn, available for cross-examination and narrative record required; Mediation — admissibility and enforceability of private mediated settlement; Res judicata/privies — a mediated boundary settlement can bind parties and their privies and bar relitigation; Evidence — material contradictions may undermine credibility and justify overturning trial findings; Remedies — declaration, vacant possession, injunctions, damages, interest and costs.
12 September 2019
Disputed overlapping registered parcels are primarily a survey issue; court ordered re‑survey and possible rectification of title.
Land law – Overlapping title descriptions – survey issue not pure title dispute; rectification of register for mistaken overlapping entries; part‑parcel adverse possession requirements; priority of registered interests (race, notice, race‑notice); necessity to re‑open boundaries and re‑survey to protect Torrens system integrity.
12 September 2019
Respondents failed to prove better title; defective locus-in-quo procedure was not prejudicial and appeal succeeded.
* Civil procedure – locus in quo – procedural requirements: sworn demonstration, opportunity for cross‑examination, and narrative recording of observations. * Evidence – demonstrative evidence at locus in quo has no independent evidentiary value; it illustrates witness testimony. * Land law – possession versus title: plaintiff must prove a better title; possession is good against all but a person with superior title. * Appellate review – re‑evaluation of evidence and interference where trial court reverses burden or overlooks material features.
12 September 2019
Appellate court upheld trial finding of respondent’s ownership based on credible testimony and locus inspection; appeal dismissed.
* Evidence – assessment of credibility and weight – appellate re-appraisal of oral testimony and physical evidence from locus in quo. * Land law – ownership dispute – role of locus in quo inspection and physical markers in resolving competing possession claims. * Damages – trespass – appellate interference only where award is inordinately high/low or founded on wrong principle.
12 September 2019
A grant procured by false statements and inadequate notice can be revoked and replaced; culpable administrator may pay costs.
Succession law – Revocation of letters of administration for fraudulent statements or concealment; failure to notify beneficiaries as just cause; grant de bonis non – factors: consanguinity, nature of interest, safety of estate and probability of proper administration; administrator’s personal liability for costs where conduct is reprehensible.
12 September 2019
Long, acquiescent occupation recognizing a road as the common boundary established respondents' possession; appeal dismissed.
* Land law – Boundary determination – long, acquiescent and undisturbed occupation as evidence of boundary; physical features (road) can become true boundary by recognition and acquiescence after long use. * Property – Unregistered customary holdings – possession, homesteads, graves and cultivation as proof of title and exclusive occupation. * Civil procedure – Appeal – re-appraisal of evidence by first appellate court and weight to locus in quo observations.
12 September 2019
Applicant obtained setting aside of ex‑parte decree due to lack of hearing notice and misrepresentation.
Civil procedure – Setting aside ex‑parte judgment – Discretion to set aside for inadvertence/excusable mistake; not for deliberate evasion; Order 9 rr.10 & 11 (service and hearing notice) in non‑liquidated claims; appellate re‑hearing where trial overlooked material procedural defects.
12 September 2019
Court granted mandamus compelling government to pay a taxed judgment debt or provide a bank guarantee, with costs.
* Administrative law – mandamus – enforcement of taxed costs against the State – Certificate of Taxation/Certificate of Order as trigger for payment obligation under Section 19 Government Proceedings Act. * Civil procedure – ex parte proceedings – unchallenged affidavit evidence – relief by judicial review under Section 37 Judicature Act. * Public finance – Treasury Officer of Accounts’ duty to satisfy court decrees; alternative of bank guarantee to secure judgment debt.
11 September 2019