Lawpointuganda

🎄 Season's Greetings 🎄
From us to you ❤️✨

🚨 This evening.🚨

As we round up 2025, join us for an engaging discussion centered on;

🧵 The 2025 Legal Roundup: Lessons, Challenges & Opportunities for 2026

🔔 Set your reminder & join the conversation:
https://x.com/i/spaces/1lPJqvoaARdxb?s=20

The Industrial Court of Uganda has reaffirmed that employees who report wrongdoing in good faith are protected from retaliatory termination. Dismissals issued after a DPP clearance require scrutiny, as they are likely biased.

The Court observed that under Section 65 of the Employment Act, employers must provide written notice of allegations, hearing rights, and proof of misconduct. Oral notifications or inconsistent evidence lead to findings of unfairness.

Read more
https://lawpointuganda.com/post/the-industrial-court-of-uganda-has-reaffirmed-that-employees-who-report-wrongdoing-in-good-faith-are

THIS EVENING!
Is your health data really safe? 🤔

Join us for a deeper discussion on how the proposed USA–Uganda Health Data Sharing Agreement could impact your privacy rights.

💬 Expert Panel
• Counsel Gilbert Ssetuuma — Compliance & Investigations,
Personal Data Protection Office UG

Silver Kayondo — Partner, Ortus Advocates

Ivan Ojakol — Partner, MatrixAdvocates

• Joanita Nagaba— CIPP/E, CIPM (IAPP)

🎙 Moderator:
Mutesi Rebbecca

🗓 Date: Today

⏰ Time: 7:30PM – 9:00PM (EAT)

📍 Join the Space 🔗
https://x.com/i/spaces/1gqxvrpajpWxB?s=20

Don’t miss this timely conversation on digital rights, privacy, and the future of health data governance.

Set your reminder! 🚀

High Court at Kampala Confirms Police-Impounded Property Still Enforceable as Collateral.

The Court confirmed that Pride Bank possessed a valid, perfected security interest and therefore enjoyed statutory enforcement rights under the Security Interest in Movable Property Act (SIMPA).

The Court found that perfection through the caveat granted Pride Bank priority and entitled it to enforce its rights without the need for judicial process, save for the fact that the collateral was in police custody.

Read more
https://lawpointuganda.com/post/high-court-at-kampala-confirms-police-impounded-property-still-enforceable-as-collateral

Today's Quote

Read more
https://lawpointuganda.com/post/cohabitation-no-matter-how-lengthy-or-how-genuine-the-parties-belief-in-the-existence-of-a-marria

“Illiterates often lack familiarity with legal procedures. Our court system remains the only safeguard in protecting the rule of law.” High Court at Kabale Allows Enlargement of Time for Filing Appeal Despite Five-Year Delay

The Court expressed systemic concerns regarding access to justice for unrepresented and illiterate litigants. Noting that only about 5% of disputes reach the courts, though the number is increasing, the Court observed that such litigants often inadvertently initiate appeals incorrectly, as seen where the Applicants filed a notice of appeal instead of a memorandum.

A similar procedural inversion had arisen in Frank Ngabirano v Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2025, where the appellant filed a memorandum instead of a notice of appeal and took no steps to rectify the error.

Read more

“Illiterates often lack familiarity with legal procedures Our court system remains the only safeguard.” High Court at Kabale Allows Enlargement of Time for Filing Appeal Despite Five-Year Delay The Court reiterated that in applications for enlargement of time, the decisive consideration is whether the litigant has taken affirmative steps to correct procedural mistakes and actively pursue their rights. Courts must assess whether parties or their advocates have demonstrated diligence in curi...

We are humbled and excited to share that the Radical New Bar, championed by Isaac Ssemakadde, S.C., together with the Uganda Law Society, has honoured Lawpointuganda with the Digital Excellence Award.

This recognition celebrates our journey of using digital innovation to transform legal awareness, inspire critical conversations, and deepen public understanding of Uganda’s law and justice system.

We dedicate this award to our amazing community of followers and readers whose engagement keeps us motivated to keep breaking barriers and reimagining access to the law. 🙏💡

A big thank you to the Uganda Law Society and to everyone who believes in our mission — this is just the beginning!⚖️

Family Law Practice Updates on Estate Planning in Uganda.

HIGH COURT AFFIRMS THAT TESTAMENTARY FREEDOM ALLOWS A TESTATOR TO DICTATE PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION. HOWEVER, FAMILY AGREEMENTS MODIFYING ESTATE DISTRIBUTION CAN BE BINDING IF ALL BENEFICIARIES CONSENT.

(In simple terms, a will concerning equal estate distribution can be modified if all beneficiaries consent)

The Plaintiffs contended that after the Uganda National Roads Authority (UNRA) compensated for the compulsory acquisition of part of the estate land, the Defendants refused to distribute the remaining proceeds of the estate sale equitably. The Defendants countered this argument, stating that the dispute was not about refusal but rather about the mode of distribution—whether in equal shares or per the proportions prescribed in the Will.

The Court determined that the Plaintiffs were unclear in their demands. They initially challenged the sale of the suit property but later withdrew their claim against the buyers, indicating prior involvement in the sale. The evidence presented, including a letter from the Local Council and Resident District Commissioner (RDC), confirmed that the dispute was about the method of distribution rather than outright refusal.

Citing In the Matter of the Estate of Nyombi v. Kagimu & Others (HCT-00-CV-CS-0211-2015), where the court held that estate administrators must distribute proceeds according to either the terms of the Will or an agreed family arrangement,

The court found that the Defendants had not refused to distribute but rather had disagreements over the method of allocation.

Citing Kajubi v. Kabali & Others [2005] UGCA 7, the Court of Appeal emphasized that a claim of refusal to distribute an estate must be supported by clear evidence of deliberate withholding of the estate's proceeds.

The same principle was applied in this case to determine that there was no outright refusal but a dispute over proportions.

Read more and find the full case below

HIGH COURT AFFIRMS THAT TESTAMENTARY FREEDOM ALLOWS A TESTATOR TO DICTATE PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION. HOWEVER, FAMILY AGREEMENTS MODIFYING ESTATE DISTRIBUTION CAN BE BINDING IF ALL BENEFICIARIES CONSENT. Where an Administrator receives a larger share due to external factors, redistribution may be warranted to ensure fairness among beneficiar