Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

The Civil Division is a division of the high court. It's functions include: Hearing appeal cases from the Magistrates' courts in connection with torts committed against the person, Defamation, Bankruptcy and company winding up matters, Partnership matters,Companies matters, Real and personal property.

Physical address
Twed towers, along Kafu Road, Nakasero.
Visit website
https://judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/12/Civil%20Division.html
11 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
11 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2016
Akello v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 19 of 2011) [2016] UGHCCD 27 (31 March 2016)
Labour and Employment Law
 31 March 2016
Kazooya v Attorney General Anor (Misc. Cause No. 0197 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 22 (30 March 2016)
Mandamus to compel government payment denied where budgetary inability and no unequivocal refusal to pay were shown.
* Administrative law – mandamus – requirements: legal duty, necessity, demand, unequivocal refusal, no alternative remedy. * Judgment debts against government – decree and certificate of order against government; effect on payment. * Public finance – budgeting and appropriation as a legitimate constraint on immediate payment of government debts. * Judicial review – supervisory jurisdiction does not override statutory budgetary processes absent refusal to perform duty.
 30 March 2016
Leads Insurance Company v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 056 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 31 (30 March 2016)
State organs’ refusal to comply with a court order violated the applicant’s property rights and attracted damages.
Constitutional law — compliance with court orders — duty of state organs (Art.128) to assist courts; right to property (Art.40) — unlawful retention of company titles during criminal investigations; corporate distinctness — shareholders’ investigations do not justify withholding company property; remedies — declarations, release of titles, general and punitive damages; requirement for strict proof of special damages.
 30 March 2016
Aliganyira & Anor v Kabakumba & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 0163 of 2014) [2016] UGHCCD 1 (24 March 2016)
Civil Procedure
 24 March 2016
Panakat Mohammad Ashraf v Attorney General & Ors (Misc. Application No. 0121 of 2013) [2016] UGHCCD 23 (24 March 2016)
The applicant entitled to mandamus compelling the respondents to pay a decreed government debt after unreasonable delay and non-response.
* Judicial review – mandamus – compelling payment of a court-ordered decretal sum against a government entity; requisites for mandamus: clear legal right, duty, demand, unequivocal refusal, no alternative remedy; evidence required to repel mandamus where respondents claim lack of funds or payment plans.
 24 March 2016
James Lule Apollo Ltd(MDI) v Pride Micro Finance (Civil Suit No. 150 of 2012) [2016] UGHCCD 29 (22 March 2016)
Summary dismissal upheld where forensic evidence linked the applicant to fraud and disciplinary procedure complied with law.
Employment law – summary dismissal – fundamental breach of duty – forensic evidence linking employee login to unauthorized modification of Super Account – compliance with disciplinary procedure and Employment Act (sections 63, 69) – entitlement to damages.
 22 March 2016
Kasaato v Lugwago (Civil Suit No. 457 of 2005) [2016] UGHCCD 30 (22 March 2016)
The plaintiff’s suit was dismissed as res judicata because identical issues had been finally decided in an earlier suit.
* Civil procedure – res judicata – Section 7 Civil Procedure Act – claim barred where same matter directly and substantially in issue and finally decided in earlier suit. * Sale of goods/contract – disputes arising from a contract of sale cannot be relitigated once decided on the merits. * Procedural finality – failure to appeal a decision does not permit refiling same cause in a higher court.
 22 March 2016
The Ramgarhia Sikh Society & Ors v The Ramgarhia Education Society Limited & Ors (Misc. Application No. 352 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 12 (15 March 2016)
Court refused to set aside consent judgment, finding no fraud and admitting late reply affidavit in the interests of justice.
Civil procedure – application to set aside consent judgment – principles allowing interference with consent decrees (fraud, collusion, mistake, misapprehension) – affidavit in reply filed out of time but admitted in discretion – trustees’ authority under Trustees Incorporation Act – counsel’s authority to enter consent.
 15 March 2016
Mugumya v Attorney General (Misc. Cause No. 0116 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCD 43 (14 March 2016)
Judicial review application filed years after interdiction was struck out as time‑barred under Rule 5.
Judicial review — Time limits — Rule 5, Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules: applications must be made promptly and within three months; applicability of Judicial Review Rules despite concurrent invocation of constitutional or Judicature Act provisions; preliminary objection for delay; striking out time‑barred applications; costs awarded to successful respondent.
 14 March 2016
Cottifield East Africa (U) Ltd v Uganda Ginners and Cotton Exporters Association Ltd (HCT-04-CV-CS-0019-2013) [2016] UGHCCD 14 (3 March 2016)
Subscriptions and CDF contributions were lawful and not recoverable; plaintiff’s claim dismissed with costs.
Company law – membership and hybrid company forms; Contracts – validity of subscription obligations under Articles of Association; Restitution – illegality, mistake and recoverability of payments; Equity – approbation and reprobation/privy to illegality; Procedure – burden of proof on balance of probabilities.
 3 March 2016
Praful Chandra R. Patel v Manafwa & Ors (HCT-04-CV-CA-0013/2015) [2016] UGHCCD 13 (3 March 2016)
Appellant failed to disclose a cause of action and to prove repossession; appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Cause of action – plaint must disclose cause of action by pleadings and annexures; requirement to produce originals or certified copies of title and administration documents; burden of proof in civil claims; repossession under Expropriated Properties Act – evidential requirements; appellate review of trial magistrate findings.
 3 March 2016