This was a second appeal from the ruling and order of
High Court which upheld the findings and orders of the
Court considered whether the appellant judge failed to
Court ruled that the appellant judge considered the
evidence availed to the lower court by both the appellant
and the respondent. She certainly had to choose to believe
one side and not the other, that is the ordinalry duty of a
judge in the judicial decision process. A judicial officer
who concluded when believing one party and not the
other is judging after hearing and that is not bias.
Court further considered whether the trial and appellant
court had jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Court ruled that the cars which are the suit property were
in Uganda by the time the suit was filed in court. Botht
parties were living in Uganda within the jurisdiction of
Court found that the appellant judge and the trial judge
did not err in finding that there was no failure of justice in
having the matter heard in Uganda rather than Japan.
Court accordingly dismissed the appeal with costs