Lawpoint Uganda

The Court noted that the Plaintiff’s own demand letter dated 21 September 2023 (PEX.2) indicated that only UGX 98,050,000 was outstanding at that time. After the UGX 30,000,000 payment, the balance dropped to UGX 68,050,000; however, a new LPO for 10 tons was issued and supplied, restoring the outstanding balance to UGX 105,050,000.

If the injunction were granted, the Respondent would lose access to a property she has managed for years, along with the benefit of her substantial personal involvement and the protective value of the asset securing the joint loan, exposing her to loss that may not be easily reversed.

Spousal consent under the Land Act only applies to land that meets the statutory definition of "family land"—i.e., land where the family ordinarily resides or derives sustenance at the time of the transaction. Developing property (at slab level) may not qualify.

The recent merger agreement between Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) and Netflix has caught the attention of law students and corporate law enthusiasts alike. This deal is not just significant for the entertainment industry but also offers a fascinating look into complex legal structuring in mergers. The agreement involves a series of internal restructuring steps on WBD’s side before the actual merger with Netflix takes place. Understanding these steps is crucial for anyone inter

The court found that the vendors sold their beneficial interest in the estate land. “The thrust of that provision [S. 188 of the Succession Act] is that actions made in the course of administration relate back to the time of death of the deceased. The effect is that the grant of letters of administration validates legitimate actions of the administrator(s) taken prior to the grant in respect of the estate of an intestate. Specifically, actions which would ordinarily amount to

Letters of administration remain valid for two years, However, any suit instituted during their valid life remains valid throughout, including on appeal. Expiry does not extinguish locus standi for proceedings already commenced.

Any agreement involving sensitive health data must be grounded in Clear legal safeguards, Strong oversight, Local control, and Transparent engagement with the public Uganda stands at an inflection point. A well-negotiated agreement can strengthen health cooperation. A weak one could compromise the digital rights of millions for decades.

The Court observed that Reconciliation agreements recorded before an LC1 Court amount to consent judgments, which are final and unappealable under Section 31(1) of the Local Council Courts Act.They may only be set aside on the narrow grounds of fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation, which must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved.

Actions for redemption of mortgaged land must be commenced within twelve (12) years from the date the cause of action accrues. The Court further clarified that limitation extinguishes not only the remedy but the right itself in actions for recovery or redemption of land.

It was held in the case of Uganda Farmers Meat Co. Limited Vs Fresh Cuts Uganda Ltd (supra) that the burden of proving that equity and good conscience does not demand a refund devolves upon the Defendant who offers such a defence to the claim of the creditor. That it is settled law that once the Plaintiff makes out a prima facie case in his favour, the evidential burden shifts to the Defendant to controvert the Plaintiff’s prima facie case; otherwise, judgment must be entered

The Claimant was removed from the premises partly due to her health status, but the Respondent failed to follow the statutory and judicial procedures governing termination due to ill health. Applying the principle from Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd v Nassanga, the Court held: “Where an employer gives a reason for termination, then it must hold a hearing.” The Claimant was never accorded any disciplinary hearing, rendering the termination procedurally unfair.

The Court established that a finding of matrimonial property is normally associated with the dissolution of a marriage, rather than death. in any event, death would end the marriage and the provisions of the law of succession under Section 2 of the succession act would apply. Court citing the case of Mary Martin V Kakuru Moses and 2 others HCT-11-CV-CS-0036, stated that the land may have become family land at the time the sale was entered into. in the instant case, once a fi

To set aside a decree under Order 36 Rule 11, the Applicant must demonstrate "any other good cause." Claiming a mere oversight or a notification delay, especially when contradicted by reliable system evidence, does not meet this threshold.

The Court relied on the Court of Appeal decision in Nalongo Burashe v Kekitiibwa Magdalena, Civil Appeal No. 89 of 2011, which held that LC II Courts (Parish/Ward Executive Committee Courts) have original jurisdiction in land matters. The Judge found that the Court of Appeal decision overrides earlier conflicting High Court decisions. Therefore, LC II Courts do retain original jurisdiction in land matters.

The Court found that ULC had absolutely no power to rescind a lease once it had been registered under the RTA. “Once the respondent issues a lease and the lease is registered on the title, the respondent does not have the powers to rescind or cancel that lease.”...“There are procedures by which land under the RTA may be de-registered… Failure to comply renders the decision a nullity.”

To successfully raise an alibi, the defense must effectively demonstrate that the accused had no opportunity to commit the crime. A simple denial is insufficient against compelling circumstantial evidence.

The Court examined Article 239 of the Constitution (ULC functions) Section 51(3) of the Land Act (only the Secretary conducts ULC correspondence) Minute 20-2 of 31st March 2015 The minute clearly indicated the application was deferred, not approved. The letters (PE3 and PE7) from the ULC Chairperson were held invalid because they violated s.51(3) of the Land Act: “I find that the communication through the two letters by the Chairperson of the Commission, PE3 and PE7, were i

While citing Section 136 (6) of the Children Act Cap 62, which states that a child shall not be remanded in an adult prison, court declared the trial of the applicant illegal and discontinued all criminal proceedings against him. This was because the applicant AJ, A6 on the indictment was remanded in prison on November 11, 2024 and he had been held in the two Ugandan government prisons of Kisoro and Ndorwa, in Kisoro and Kabale districts respectively.

The Court held that the petitioner did not fall within the exception set out by the Supreme Court's ruling in Kabaziguruka that allowed for the retrospective application of the unconstitutionality finding, as her conviction and sentence were no longer "being challenged in a court of law" within the context of the military justice system or its ordinary appeals.

“The 28 days within which the Plaintiff was supposed to take out summons for directions have since elapsed. Therefore, the Plaintiff did not comply with the mandatory provision of Order 11A, Rule 1 (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.”

The Court examined whether the bank breached its fiduciary obligations when it acted on the order. In doing so, it adopted both English and Ugandan jurisprudence on freezing and garnishee orders, particularly the landmark decision in Customs & Excise Commissioners v Barclays Bank Plc, later followed by the Supreme Court of Uganda in Arim v Stanbic.“A bank’s relationship with its customers is subject to the law of the land… It seems to me in the final analysis unjust and unrea

The Court found that the trial judge erred when he concluded that the Respondent was a bona fide occupant within the meaning of the land law framework. The Court emphasized that bona fide occupancy is strictly defined by statute, including the cut-off dates for occupation. This observation confirms that occupation commencing in 1993 falls outside the statutory protections accorded to bona fide occupants. The Court therefore held that the trial judge misapplied the law by exte

A local government claiming pre-independence customary grant (1915) must produce credible evidence of (a) actual alienation by the colonial authorities or recognised customary grant and (b) continuous utilisation. Mere oral tradition and long use by parish chiefs was held insufficient when contradicted by documentary evidence of private inheritance.

The Court cited the statutory position that: “Where the enforcement of a security interest is commenced by a secured creditor other than the secured creditor whose right has priority over that of the enforcing creditor, the secured creditor shall be entitled to take over the enforcement at any time before the sale of the collateral.” The Court further observed that lodging a caveat promptly—as was done on 18th August 2022—solidifies a creditor’s priority under the Security I