|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2022 |
|
|
A university may lawfully cancel provisional admission if verification shows the applicant lacks the required chartered-university qualification.
Universities — provisional admissions subject to verification; requirement of degree from chartered university for postgraduate entry; university senate’s authority over academic matters; conditional admission and promissory estoppel; limits of affiliated institutions’ authority.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Appeal struck out where commenced by notice rather than required memorandum and filed two years late without leave or good cause.
Civil procedure — Appeal to High Court — Order 43(1) memorandum of appeal required; notice of appeal insufficient — Limitation: section 79(1)(a) 30-day rule and discretion to admit out-of-time appeals — Mistake of counsel not automatically excusing procedural non-compliance — Incompetent appeal struck out with costs.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Court struck out consolidated suits: earlier judgment barred lease challenge (res judicata) and eviction claims lacked legal basis.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objection – admissibility of affidavit sworn by advocate employed by retained firm – advocate may depose to facts within his knowledge without separate authorization attachment.
* Res judicata – final determination of legality of leases over registered land bars subsequent suits raising same issue; supremacy of Registration of Titles Act over inconsistent local enactments.
* Pleadings – failure to disclose reasonable cause of action – unlawful occupation/unlicensed market cannot found claim for unlawful eviction or confer locus standi.
* Relief – striking out/dismissal of consolidated suits and award of costs to applicants.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal granted where applicant not party to original suit presented prima facie arguable ownership claim.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal (Order 44 r.2) – Discretionary grant where prima facie grounds or real prospects of success exist – Review at execution stage – New evidence and ownership claims – Respondent default (no reply) – Leave granted.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal and stay refused where dispute concerns internal company management and no substantial question of law shown.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal (Order 44 r.2 CPR) – Sango Bay test for grant of leave; Company law – internal management disputes – judicial non-interference in disciplinary processes under Articles; Interim relief – overtaken by events; Employment remedies – alternative avenues and abuse of court.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Whether non-party directors are bound by an injunction directed at specific individuals and their agents.
Contempt of court — requirement of a clear and unambiguous order; Personam injunctions — bind only named persons and their agents/representatives; Corporate law — directors as the directing mind and will of the company; Non-parties — limitation on extending injunctions to unmentioned directors.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Judicial review unavailable for a private employment dispute; claimant must exhaust Employment Act remedies.
* Administrative law – Judicial review – Amenability – Employment disputes by public bodies do not automatically engage public law.
* Labour law – Employment contract – Remedy under Employment Act – Exhaustion of statutory remedies required before judicial review.
* Civil procedure – Affidavit practice – Supplementary affidavit filed without leave struck out.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Plaintiffs failed to prove torture, property loss or business disruption; suit dismissed for lack of credible and corroborative evidence.
Constitutional right — freedom from torture; strict evidential standard for establishing torture; burden of proof on claimant; media reports and tribunal findings insufficient to prove individual victimhood; proof of property ownership required for deprivation claims; credibility and corroboration essential in civil rights claims against State actors.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Court partially revised taxed costs, upholding a UGX 30,000,000 instruction fee but reducing several disbursements under remuneration rules.
* Taxation of costs – Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations (Schedule VI) – instruction fees for election petitions – limits and factors (nature, complexity, place, time, public interest).
* Judicial review of taxing officer – scope of interference limited except where wrong principle or manifest excess/deficiency.
* Disbursements – perusals included in instruction fees; travel, facilitation and witness transport require evidence; prohibition of double taxation.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
A statutory 30‑day appeal period under the Advocates Act cannot be extended absent enabling provision; delay and counsel negligence were not sufficient cause.
* Civil procedure – taxation appeal – validity of out-of-time appeal – requirement to seek extension prior to filing when statute prescribes time limit.
* Advocates Act s.62(1) – 30-day statutory appeal period to High Court against taxing officer – specific statute displaces general extension powers.
* Extension of time – sufficiency of cause – negligence of counsel and COVID-19 lockdown held not satisfactorily proved to excuse delay.
* Procedural irregularity – filing appeal before seeking validation/extension is impermissible.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
The respondent’s suit, commenced by disputed directors without proper company authority, was dismissed for lack of authority.
* Company law – authority to sue – capacity of a company to sue and be sued – necessity for proper internal authority/resolution before committing company to litigation.
* Civil procedure – striking out pleadings – Order 6 r.30 (pleading discloses no reasonable cause of action).
* Corporate governance – disputed director appointments and management coups – internal disputes should be resolved by proper channels, not by binding the company without proper authorization.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Directors acting in their corporate capacity were not in contempt where the injunction was personam against other named individuals.
Contempt of court — requirement of clear, unambiguous personam order; injunctions in personam do not automatically bind other directors; directors' corporate acts may not constitute contempt absent agency or direct restraint.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
Application for judicial review of title cancellation dismissed: out of time; Commissioner lawfully corrected register and procedural fairness upheld.
Administrative law – judicial review – limitation and extension of time for judicial review; Land law – powers of Commissioner of Land Registration to rectify register errors and cancel titles; Procedural fairness – Article 42 administrative fairness vs Article 28 right to a court hearing; Effect of pendency of court proceedings on Commissioner’s exercise of powers; Service by registered mail and waiver by failure to attend hearing.
|
31 October 2022 |
|
A Magistrate Grade I may issue distress certificates, but such certificates are void where ownership and tenancy are disputed.
Distress for Rent Act – certifying officer – Magistrate Grade I; Jurisdiction – statutory creature of law; Distress for rent – requirements: ownership, landlord–tenant relationship, rent arrears; Pending land dispute and stay of dealings – bar to distress; Revision under section 83 CPA – setting aside illegal/materially irregular orders.
|
28 October 2022 |
|
A distress for rent certificate is void where ownership and tenancy are disputed and a High Court stay restrains dealings.
Distress for rent — jurisdiction of Magistrate Grade I as certifying officer under the Distress for Rent Act; requirement of proven landlord–tenant relationship and proof of ownership before issuing distress; effect of pending High Court proceedings and stay on dealings — certificates issued in such circumstances are null and void.
|
28 October 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal refused; application unserved/tardy and dismissal for want of prosecution an abuse of process.
Civil procedure — Leave to appeal under Order 44/Section 98 — Service requirements under Order 5 Rule 1(2) CPR — Extension of time — Dismissal for want of prosecution — Exercise of judicial discretion to prevent abuse of process — Arguable grounds/serious questions of law for appeal — Costs in public interest litigation.
|
28 October 2022 |
|
An application to release property from attachment is premature where no warrant or execution has been issued.
Civil Procedure — Objector proceedings (Order 22 rules 55, 57) — Attachment — Release from attachment premature where no warrant or execution issued; disputed ownership/fraud allegations require ordinary suit.
|
28 October 2022 |
|
Court reduced manifestly excessive instruction fees in interlocutory consequential-orders application, substituting UGX 2,000,000 and each party bears own costs.
Taxation of costs – instruction fees – whether application for consequential orders is interlocutory or independent suit – application of Sixth Schedule (Rule 1 Part C; paragraph 9(2)) – reduction of manifestly excessive fees.
|
27 October 2022 |
|
|
26 October 2022 |
|
Repossessed property under the Expropriated Properties Act cannot be re-vested; respondent’s interference was ultra vires.
* Judicial review – amenability – public body and public law nature of dispute
* Expropriated Properties Act – effect of repossession certificate – Minister functus officio
* Illegality/ultra vires – public authority may not reverse repossession or re-vest property absent statutory route
* Remedies – declarations, certiorari, prohibition and permanent injunction available in judicial review
* Damages in judicial review – require separate cause of action; not awarded here
|
25 October 2022 |
|
|
25 October 2022 |
|
An NGO’s indefinite cancellation was quashed for lack of a meaningful fair hearing under the NGO Act.
Administrative law – natural justice – right to fair hearing – statutory hearing requirement under s.7(2) of the NGO Act – cancellation of NGO registration – certiorari as remedy – procedural impropriety where notice/service is contested and organisation is factionalised.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Judicial review allowed: commission’s refusal quashed for failing to consider relevant planning experience and relying on improper criteria.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety; failure to take into account relevant considerations; improper reliance on irrelevant experience requirement; scope of District Service Commission’s decision-making; remedies – quashing decision and prohibition on advertising pending reconsideration.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Court granted stay of execution pending determination of applicants' challenge to an allegedly fraudulently procured consent order.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Proper rule to invoke (Order 22 r.23 vs Order 43) – Court’s discretion to stay – Consent judgments allegedly procured by fraud – Jurisdiction under s.33 Judicature Act and s.98 Civil Procedure Act.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Applicant failed to prove substantial loss; stay of execution pending appeal refused and application dismissed with costs.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution pending appeal – Order 43 r.4 CPR – Applicant must prove likely substantial loss, absence of undue delay, and provision of security.
* Taxation appeals – Requirement of evidential proof of irreparable/substantial loss beyond decretal sum.
* Procedural – Arguments unsupported by evidence are insufficient to warrant injunctive relief (stay of execution).
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Strike-out dismissed: plaint discloses a cause of action despite a typographical error; defamation dispute to proceed to hearing.
Defamation — sufficiency of plaint to disclose cause of action — Order 7 r.11 and Order 6 rr.28–30 — misnomer/typographical error not fatal — preliminary objections requiring factual enquiry premature — single defendant may seek strike-out independently.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Applicants’ dilatory conduct and failure to show a prima facie defence disentitle them from setting aside the default judgment.
* Civil procedure – setting aside default judgment – requirements to show good cause and disclose a prima facie defence likely to succeed. * Advocacy error – mistake of counsel may excuse default but not where litigant failed to exercise due diligence or was privy to the default. * Duty of litigant – obligation to follow up with counsel and ensure prosecution of the case. * Discretion – court must form a provisional view of likely success before revoking default judgment.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Court refused interlocutory/default judgment where defence was not served in time due to counsel’s negligence.
Civil procedure – Default/interlocutory judgment – Written statement of defence – filing (court record endorsement) vs service – advocate negligence – discretionary refusal of default judgment under s.33 Judicature Act.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Appeal dismissed: affidavit by advocate/unauthorized deponent defective; taxation not manifestly excessive and stands.
Advocates Act/Procedure – Affidavits – Corporate appellant must be represented by a recognized agent; advocate deponent limited to matters within personal knowledge – defective affidavit can render appeal defective; Taxation of costs – pre‑taxation meeting mandatory but failure to attend when given opportunity may not vitiate taxation; High Court will interfere with taxing officer only for error in principle or manifestly excessive award.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
High Court dismissed internet-shutdown challenge as improperly filed public-interest constitutional matter and an abuse of process.
* Constitutional and administrative law – forum and competence – public interest human rights enforcement actions must be filed in the Constitutional Court under Article 137 and the Enforcement Rules (Rule 7(2)).
* Civil procedure – abuse of process and res judicata – re‑litigation of matters finally determined by a competent court is impermissible.
* Standing/locus – representative actions require clear mandate or demonstration that represented persons cannot sue in their own names.
|
24 October 2022 |
|
Defamation claim dismissed where plaintiff failed to produce radio recording and relied on inadmissible newspaper hearsay.
Defamation – proof of publication – necessity of primary evidence (radio recording) to prove words spoken on air; Newspaper reports as hearsay – inadmissible to prove truth; Departure from pleadings – slander pleaded cannot be substituted by libel evidence; Burden of proof on balance of probabilities; First appeal – reappraisal of evidence and miscarriage of justice where trial court mis-evaluated evidence.
|
20 October 2022 |
|
Failure to reapply after lawful restructuring amounted to self-termination; claim for wrongful dismissal and damages dismissed.
* Employment law – contract of employment – effect of project registration as company limited by guarantee and requirement to show transfer under section 28 of the Employment Act.
* Restructuring/reorganization – employer prerogative to reorganize due to donor withdrawal; requirement to notify and consult staff.
* Constructive/self-termination – failure to comply with lawful directive to reapply construed as resignation/self-termination.
* Proof of special damages – requirement that special damages be pleaded and proved; unauthenticated documentary evidence insufficient (NSSF remittance).
|
20 October 2022 |
|
The applicant was awarded compensation and damages after government compulsorily acquired land without prior payment.
Land law – Compulsory acquisition under public policy (Ranch Restructuring) – Constitutional protection against deprivation without prompt, fair and adequate compensation (Art.26) – Limitation under s.187 RTA and accrual: valuation/acceptance vs title cancellation – Judgment on admission (O.13 r.6 CPR) based on government correspondence and valuer's report – Forged/suspect deed of surrender – Quantum: assessed compensation, general and aggravated damages, interest and costs.
|
20 October 2022 |
|
The applicants' human-rights enforcement suit was dismissed for procedural defects, defective affidavits, late service and non-retrospective statute.
* Constitutional and human-rights enforcement – representative actions – requirements of O.1 r.8 CPR (leave, notice/list) – failure renders suit incompetent; * Procedure – notice of motion must be supported by affidavits and served within O.5 r.1 time limits; detached jurats render affidavits incurably defective; * Statute – Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 is not retrospective for violations predating enactment.
|
20 October 2022 |
|
First appellate court upholds district allocation and respondent’s ownership; appellants fail to prove communal title or valid representative defence.
Land law — ownership dispute — allocation by District Land Board and Area Land Committee report; communal/customary ownership — requirement to prove exclusive occupation and linkage to association; representative defence — necessity of authority/leave to represent communal members; procedural capacity — deceased and non-existent defendants.
|
20 October 2022 |
|
Application to compel graduation dismissed for failure to prove the university had resumed or authorised the Juba centre.
Judicial review — amenability and discretionary rule on exhaustion of alternative remedies — administrative decision alleged denial of recognition and clearance for graduation; proof required to show suspension of study centre lifted; representation and locus; preliminary objections on amendment and authority to depose.
|
19 October 2022 |
|
Application for stay of execution dismissed for prematurity, lack of evidence of substantial loss, security or imminent execution.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution pending appeal – Requirements under Order 43 r.4(3) – notice of appeal, absence of unreasonable delay, security, substantial loss, likelihood of success, imminent threat of execution.
* Execution – Extraction of decree alone does not constitute proof of imminent execution without an application for execution or other steps.
* Prematurity and abuse of process – Applications for stay must be supported by factual basis showing real risk and loss.
|
18 October 2022 |
|
Applicant allowed to correct typographical land description; amendment not a new cause of action nor unduly prejudicial.
Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Order 6 rule on amendment – typographical error in description of land – whether amendment introduces new cause of action – prejudice and costs – procedural defect in affidavit annexures not fatal to competence of affidavit.
|
18 October 2022 |
|
An examinations committee lawfully suspended a centre for malpractice; judicial review dismissed with costs.
Administrative law – Judicial review – locus standi under Judicial Review Rules; Examinations regulatory powers – delegation to committee; Examination malpractice vs criminal offence; Natural justice – adequacy of hearing notice, absence of bias; Rationality review – limits of merits review.
|
17 October 2022 |
|
|
14 October 2022 |
|
Stay of judicial review orders will not be granted absent special circumstances, a proper appeal and requisite protections.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution pending appeal – requirements: likelihood of success, irreparable harm, no undue delay, security for due performance.
* Judicial review – heightened circumspection before staying orders that correct illegality by public bodies; stays may perpetuate wrongful conduct.
* Enforcement – remedies for non‑compliance with judicial review orders include contempt proceedings.
* Appeals – requirement for appropriate leave where applicable to appeals from orders made on application.
|
14 October 2022 |
|
Section 93 of the Employment Act does not oust Magistrates’ concurrent jurisdiction over employment disputes.
* Employment law – jurisdiction – Section 93 Employment Act 2006 – whether Labour Officer’s jurisdiction ousts Magistrates’ Courts – concurrent versus exclusive forum.
* Civil procedure – revisional jurisdiction – High Court’s powers under section 83 CPA to examine correctness, legality and regularity of subordinate courts’ proceedings.
* Constitutional supremacy – Article 139 and Magistrates’ Courts Act section 208 – strict construction of provisions purporting to oust ordinary courts’ jurisdiction.
* Precedent – Ozuu Brothers; Former Employees of G4S; Meera Investments – alternative forums and election of remedy.
|
14 October 2022 |
|
Applicant seeking joinder as co-defendant failed to prove equitable interest in disputed land; application dismissed.
Civil procedure – Joinder of parties (O.1 r.3 CPR) – Requirement of demonstrable interest – Equitable interest – Customary/ritual use insufficient without evidence – Court’s discretion in adding parties – Reliance on joint verification and survey report.
|
14 October 2022 |
|
Applicant awarded UGX 12 billion compensation for land occupied by state‑settled squatters; attorney’s authority and estoppel upheld.
Land law – compensation for land occupied by state‑settled squatters; Power of Attorney – authority to prosecute/continue enforcement actions; Cause of action and limitation – admissions reviving claim; Administrative law – promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation; Evidence – acceptance of private valuation where government valuation absent.
|
11 October 2022 |
|
A subsequent suit duplicating issues already finally decided is res judicata, moot, and will be struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – res judicata – where a matter has been heard and finally decided by a court of competent jurisdiction, subsequent actions on the same cause are barred; Mootness – courts refuse to decide academic or overtaken disputes; Abuse of process – High Court’s inherent power under s.17(2) Judicature Act to prevent relitigation; Striking out – appropriate remedy where res judicata and lack of live controversy established.
|
10 October 2022 |
|
High Court has jurisdiction; URA’s additional tax assessment unlawful where income predated the plaintiff’s partnership membership.
* Jurisdiction – High Court’s residual/original jurisdiction in tax disputes involving interpretation of non-tax statutes (Partnership Act). * Partnership law – admission date determines liability for prior firm liabilities; s.19 Partnership Act protects new partners from pre-admission liabilities. * Taxation – partnerships not taxable entities; partners taxed individually; burden on tax authority to prove undeclared income. * Administrative law – obligation on tax authority to consider taxpayer’s evidence when determining objections.
|
7 October 2022 |
|
A political party's nomination of a sole EALA candidate is subject to judicial review; courts avoid intervening absent illegality.
* Constitutional & administrative law – Judicial review – political parties defined as public bodies under Judicature (Judicial Review) (Amendment) Rules 2019 – appropriate procedure to challenge party decisions.
* Civil procedure – Inherent jurisdiction vs statutory remedies – need to exhaust internal remedies and follow prescribed statutory routes.
* Electoral law – Nomination to EALA – partner states/parties have discretion; treaty and parliamentary rules do not mandate multiple party nominees.
* Party law – Non‑interference in internal party decisions absent illegality, unreasonableness or bad faith.
|
6 October 2022 |
|
|
4 October 2022 |
|
Trial court improperly issued arrest warrant and ordered pre‑trial security without cogent evidence; orders set aside.
Civil procedure – arrest/attachment before judgment (Order 40 r.1 CPR) – evidential threshold for issuing warrant; pre‑trial security – improper ordering of deposit/title before defence; Order 36 procedure – service and leave to appear and defend; right to fair hearing.
|
4 October 2022 |