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
16 judgments
Advanced search
Skip past Court registries
Skip past years
Skip past months
Filters
Skip to results
16 judgments
November 1995
Uganda v Moses Odipio and Others (Criminal Sessions Case No. 153 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 103 (26 November 1995)
Accused acquitted: confessions inadmissible and circumstantial recent‑possession evidence failed to prove identity in aggravated robbery.
  • Criminal law — Aggravated robbery — elements (theft, threat/use of deadly weapon, perpetrator identity); admissibility of cautioned/confessional statements — compliance with evidence (statement to police officers) Rules; circumstantial evidence — recent possession and need for in‑court linkage to stolen property; proof of deadly weapon by practical testing.
26 November 1995
July 1995
Uganda v Onenchan (Criminal Session Case 91 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 53 (6 July 1995)
6 July 1995
Uganda v Ovuru (Criminal Session Case 99 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 54 (6 July 1995)
6 July 1995
June 1995
Uganda v Aziga (Criminal Session Case 90 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 44 (29 June 1995)
29 June 1995
Uganda v Aziga Itole (Criminal Sessions Case No. 90/95) [1995] UGHC 127 (29 June 1995)
Credible victim testimony plus medical detection of sperm corroborated intercourse; forensic linkage to accused was circumstantial but conviction entered.
  • Criminal law — Defilement — Elements: victim under 18, unlawful sexual intercourse, identity of accused; corroboration in sexual offences — medical evidence of spermatozoa as corroboration of intercourse; limitations of forensic evidence — presence of sperm in accused’s urine not dispositive without comparative testing; credibility and identification of prosecutrix.
29 June 1995
Uganda v Okethwengu (Criminal Session Case 87 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 47 (21 June 1995)
21 June 1995
Uganda v Idubale (Criminal Session Case 84 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 45 (16 June 1995)
16 June 1995
Uganda v Lazaro Daniel Idubale (Criminal Session Case No. 84/95) [1995] UGHC 118 (16 June 1995)
Intoxication undermined proof of malice aforethought; unlawful striking causing death resulted in manslaughter conviction.
  • Criminal law — homicide — proof of death without post-mortem — accident defence — intoxication and malice aforethought — conviction for manslaughter where intent for murder not proved.
16 June 1995
Uganda v Remijo Asuma (Criminal Session Case No. 86/95) [1995] UGHC 119 (16 June 1995)
Victim under 18 proved, but lack of corroboration and inconclusive medical linkage led to acquittal for defilement.
  • Criminal law — Defilement — Elements: age, unlawful sexual intercourse (penetration), identity — Corroboration requirement for unsworn child evidence — Medical evidence of hymenal rupture insufficient alone to prove penile intercourse or link accused without forensic corroboration.
16 June 1995
Uganda v Remijo (Criminal Session Case 86 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 43 (16 June 1995)
16 June 1995
Uganda v Yahaya Mustafa (Criminal Session Case No. 92/95) [1995] UGHC 120 (12 June 1995)
Prosecution failed to prove victim’s age beyond reasonable doubt; unreasoned medical opinion rejected and accused acquitted.
  • Criminal law — Defilement — proof of age as essential element — expert medical opinion must disclose reasons — conflicting parental testimony creates reasonable doubt — benefit of doubt to accused.
12 June 1995
Uganda v Mustafa (Criminal Session Case No. 92/95) [1995] UGHC 96 (7 June 1995)
Conflicting age evidence does not defeat a prima facie defilement case where parental testimony sufficiently proves the victim's minority.
  • Criminal law — Prima facie case — Test from Bhatt v R — No‑case submission — Defilement elements (victim under 18, unlawful intercourse, accused) — Age proved by parent — Medical report without explanatory reasons has limited weight — Victim's consent immaterial.
7 June 1995
Uganda v David Onenchan (Criminal Session Case No. 91/95) [1995] UGHC 94 (6 June 1995)
Guilty plea to manslaughter accepted; young first offender sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
  • Criminal law — Manslaughter (s.182 Penal Code) — plea to lesser/cognate offence accepted — conviction based on admitted facts and confession — sentencing discretion; mitigating factors: youth, guilty plea, remand time, intoxication.
6 June 1995
Uganda v Kennedy Ovuru (CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO. 99/95) [1995] UGHC 100 (6 June 1995)
The accused received six years' imprisonment for defilement of an eight‑year‑old despite the offence carrying the death penalty.
  • Criminal law — Defilement (s.123(1) Penal Code) — Sentence — discretion to impose less than statutory maximum — first offender, guilty plea and time on remand as mitigating factors — voluntary intoxication not a valid excuse — medical evidence corroborating sexual assault on a child.
6 June 1995
May 1995
Uganda v Londoma Feremino (Criminal Case No. 221 of 1994) [1995] UGHC 102 (11 May 1995)
High Court confirmed a three-year sentence despite a defectively recorded guilty plea because later factual admissions cured it.
  • Magistrates Courts Act s.167(1)(2) — confirmation of sentences; Plea of guilty — requirement of clear, unequivocal plea; Procedure — record facts constituting offence before conviction (Adan v Republic); Defective plea cured by subsequent factual admission.
11 May 1995
February 1995
Uganda v Hold Candiru (Criminal Case No. 37 of 1994) [1995] UGHC 131 (28 February 1995)
High Court confirms a Grade II magistrate’s two-year sentence after an unequivocal guilty plea for malicious damage.
  • Criminal law — Malicious damage to property — Plea of guilty — Sufficiency and unequivocal nature of plea — Confirmation of magistrate's sentence under section 167 Magistrates’ Courts Act 1970
28 February 1995