Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search
background image
profile image

Supreme Court of Uganda

The Supreme Court of Uganda is the highest judicial organ in Uganda. It derives powers from Article 130 of the 1995 constitution. It is primarily an appellate court with original jurisdiction in only one type of case: a presidential election petition.

The Supreme Court is headed by the chief justice nd has ten other justices. The quorum required for a court decision varies depending on the type of case under consideration. When hearing a constitutional appeal, the required quorum is seven justices. In a criminal or a civil appeal, only five justices are required for a quorum.

 

Physical address
Plot M105, Kinawataka Road, Mbuya 1, Kampala, Uganda
Visit website
http://www.judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/7/Supreme
4 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
4 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
June 2014
Nabagesera & 3 Ors v Attorney General & Anor [2014] UGSC 403 (24 June 2014)
Closure of a workshop promoting prohibited homosexual acts was a permissible public-interest limitation; minister sued only via Attorney General.
Constitutional law – limitation of rights under Article 43 (public interest/morality); freedom of expression, assembly, association, political participation and equality; Penal Code s.145 and offences of incitement and conspiracy; promotion of prohibited homosexual acts; ministerial acts vicariously enforceable through the Attorney General; incompetence of personal suit against Minister for official acts.
 24 June 2014
Iyamulemye v AG [2014] UGSC 9 (20 June 2014)
20 June 2014
Mohammed Bahati v James Garuga Musinguzi [2014] UGSC 401 (12 June 2014)
12 June 2014
AIP ODONGO MOSES v UGANDA [2014] UGSC 404 (5 June 2014)
Appeal succeeds on soliciting charge (quashed) but convictions for accepting gratification and abuse of office are upheld.
Criminal law – Anti‑corruption Act – corrupt solicitation, corrupt acceptance of gratification and abuse of office – elements and proof required. Variance between charge particulars and evidence – material variance may vitiate prosecution and require acquittal. Abuse of office – opening police file and threats to coerce payments as abuse and common intention. Appellate review – re‑evaluation of evidence on first appeal; appellate court may substitute its own findings of fact.
 5 June 2014