Lawpoint Uganda

On the bar against using revision as a substitute for appeal, the Court relied on Section 50(5) and reaffirmed the reasoning in Semule Joel v Uganda, quoting that "the decision of a judicial officer however wrong it might seem does not become illegal or irregular simply because a party does not agree with it," and that where the irregularities cited "merely attack[] the decision of a trial Magistrate," the remedy "does not lie in Revision but rather in an appeal process." Th

The Court found that the Applicant admittedly drew, signed and filed pleadings on 18 June 2020, six days before his practising certificate issued on 25 June 2020. Applying Section 75 of the Advocates Act and Alfred Olwora v Uganda Central Co-operative Union, Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1992, the Court held that the fees for that work were irrecoverable by operation of law, regardless of which party presented the bill. The Court held that the Law Council's disciplinar

Where a land sale agreement makes completion conditional on future payment and expressly provides for a refund on default, the courts will treat it as an executory, contingent contract under sections 27–31 of the Contracts Act, not one that immediately vests equitable ownership in the buyer.

The Court found that the Defendant's bare denial of authorship, unsupported by evidence of hacking, cloning or impersonation, was less probable than the Plaintiff's case, and concluded on a balance of probabilities that the publications were legally attributable to the Defendant.

In the present case, although the Plaintiff had participated in an MOU consenting to the substitution of the original executors, the Court held that such participation could not validate a process that contravened section 183 of the Succession Act, which provides that where probate has been granted to several executors and one dies, representation accrues to the surviving executor or executors. The Court emphatically held that “participation by an interested party in an illeg

The Court considered the legal effect of the Plaintiff's executed sale agreements and payment of the purchase price and held that upon execution of a valid land sale agreement and payment of the purchase price, the purchaser acquires an equitable interest in the property. The Court found that the Plaintiff had acquired an equitable interest in the two portions measuring 69ft by 43ft and 65ft by 55ft. The Court stated that; “It is now trite that upon the execution of a valid l

The Court relied on the principle that a spouse may acquire a beneficial interest even where formal title is registered in the other spouse’s name. It held that the Plaintiff’s claim was not based merely on her status as the first Defendant’s wife. Rather, it arose from her express identification as a purchaser, her contribution to development, and the parties’ subsequent use of the property.

The High Court had held that a memorandum of appeal was mandatory for commencement of an appeal. However, the Court in the present case clarified that this requirement had to be considered alongside the statutory requirement concerning the decree. The Court observed that the memorandum of appeal was necessary, but that the memorandum could not be considered in isolation from the requirement under Section 79(1) of the Civil Procedure Act concerning the decree or o

The court identified three factors favouring the applicant (the filing of a notice and memorandum of appeal, and the promptness of the application following service of the notice to show cause) against two factors weighing against her (i) the execution related solely to a taxed monetary sum which she had not appealed, removing any risk that the appeal itself would be rendered nugatory; and (ii) she had not adduced evidence that the respondents lacked the means to refund the t

The Court held that where a kibanja is held under the reversionary interest of the Kabaka of Buganda, the consent required for a transaction involving the kibanja must be obtained from the landowner through the Buganda Land Board, and not merely from the local Omutongole wa Kabaka.

The Court also relied on section 92, which recognises the production to a company of sufficient evidence of probate or letters of administration as evidence of the grant. The Court observed that these statutory provisions establish an important distinction between ownership of the shares as an asset of the estate and membership of the company.

On the nature of the wrong, the Court held that where a public authority continues to withhold or delay execution of a valid appointment, this constitutes an ongoing administrative omission rather than a single completed act, so that limitation does not run until the authority's conduct explicitly indicates that no appointment will be honoured. It was noted, however, that deferred deployment is permissible only as a temporary and reasonable administrative expedient, and canno

The Court held that registration of title does not automatically extinguish every cause of action a third party may later assert over the same land, and that a plaint is only liable to rejection under Order 7 rule 11(d) of the Civil Procedure Rules where it discloses, on its own face, that the suit is time-barred. The Court drew a sharp distinction between “matrimonial property”, as defined in Julius Rwabinumi v Hope Bahimbisomwe (property acquired during the marriage, or agr

The Court held that the criminal prosecution is being used as a tactical lever by the 3rd to 5th respondents as a means of unleashing the immense stress and cost of a criminal case to wear down an opponent, in order to force an advantage in a property ownership dispute, bypass the land registry, and intimidate the applicant. Criminal courts should not be converted into land registries or tribunals to determine the authenticity of rival land titles and competing historical roo

The Court addressed the practice of moonlighting, holding two jobs at once, as a distinct question from restraint of trade. Citing Bowers and Honeyball's Textbook on Labour Law, the Court noted that moonlighting is common and, in some circumstances, lawful, particularly where a contract carries no requirement of exclusivity and no harm to the primary employer is shown, as in Nova Plastics v Froggart, where an odd-job man was found not to be in breach for working for his emplo

Applying the three-part test in Asege Winnie v. Opportunity Bank (U) Ltd & Anor, the Court found the Plaintiff identifiable, the Defendants’ conduct deliberate, and the publication commercially motivated, sustaining the claim for misappropriation and passing off of personality. The Court further found that the Plaintiff’s name, profession, and stated opinion constituted personal data, unlawfully processed and republished to an audience beyond his own followers without his c

Justice Ssemogerere observed that Mr. Ntare had no independent interest in the criminal revision proceedings and that his actions were undertaken solely for financial gain and to obstruct justice. The Court further relied on Halsbury's Laws of England, defining criminal contempt as: "Criminal Contempt, consisting of words or acts which impede or interfere with the administration of justice, or which create a substantial risk that the course of justice will be seriously impede

The Court defined "retrenchment" as "the termination of employees for economic reasons, such as cost-cutting, restructuring, or downsizing, rather than for disciplinary actions," citing the ILO. It further noted that retrenchment is "not done as a punishment or disciplinary action, but it is intended to reduce surplus Labour or to address financial position of the business or company." The Court cited Justice BM Katureebe JSC (as he then was) in Samuel Lubega, Lawrence Kamule

Applying Section 9(1) of the Contracts Act, Cap. 284, and citing William Kasozi v. DFCU Bank Ltd, the Court reiterated that once a contract is validly executed, it creates reciprocal rights and obligations, and a signatory is bound by its terms absent fraud or misrepresentation. Breach of contract was defined, per Meridiana Africa Airlines (U) Ltd v. Avmax Spares (EA) Ltd, as a failure, without lawful excuse, to perform any promise forming all or part of a binding contract, i

Employers who unlawfully dismiss employees are generally liable to relieve or reimburse the employee for unsecured loans that were expected to be paid from the employee's monthly salary. Secured loans (e.g., mortgages) are distinct legal contracts and are not automatically cancelled. However, courts will not permit employers to switch the interest rate on such loans from a preferential staff rate to a higher commercial rate following an unfair dismissal, as this would consti

The Court characterised the removal of an employee's work tools as "a deliberately oppressive labour practice," treating it as strong evidence of breach of the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence, drawing on its own precedent in Granada Hotels Uganda Limited v Tayssiir Zereli and on the Supreme Court of Canada's reasoning in Potter v New Brunswick Legal Aid Services Commission, where cutting off an employee's work tools without disciplinary justification was found to

The Court held that the Claimant, recruited from Kaberamaido and dismissed after more than fifteen years of service, was entitled to repatriation under Section 39 of the Employment Act, but declined to enhance the CBA's fixed sum of UGX 400,000, holding that it could not rewrite the parties' bargain once they had agreed the CBA governed. Because the dismissal was found unjustified, the statutory bar on severance pay for employees summarily dismissed for gross misconduct did n

The Court found that the Plaintiff had complied with section 252(1) of the Succession Act by filing the present suit for removal of the caveat well within six months after the caveat had been lodged. Relying on the statutory scheme governing succession proceedings, the Court held that failure by a caveator to institute proceedings within the prescribed period results in the caveat lapsing by operation of law. The Court further endorsed the reasoning in Kawuki David & Others

The Court held that the Respondent appeared to have fallen victim to an online fraud perpetrated by an individual posing as a Japanese motor vehicle dealer. The Court emphasised that banks are not insurers against their customers' commercial decisions or fraudulent transactions initiated by customers themselves. The Court stated: "The appellant cannot be held liable for the fraud into which the respondent was induced." It further held that once the Bank had processed the cust