Prominent Kampala corporate and commercial lawyer Charles Odere, the Managing Partner of Landwell Advocates & Solicitors, has formally moved to challenge a 12-month suspension imposed by the Law Council, escalating a long-running dispute that has its roots in one of Uganda’s most protracted and high-profile property battles.
Court documents seen by CEO East Africa Magazine show that Odere has filed a Notice of Appeal before the High Court of Uganda, seeking to overturn the decision of the Law Council’s Disciplinary Committee delivered on 30 April 2026, which suspended him from legal practice for twelve months.
The appeal marks the latest chapter in a dispute stretching back more than sixteen years and centred on the controversial sale of Blacklines House on Colville Street and Hotel Diplomat in Muyenga, assets that have been the subject of extensive litigation involving businessman Mukesh Shukla, his Shumuk Group, and the estate of the late Dr. Bonny Mwebesa Katatumba.
While the Law Council’s Disciplinary Committee accuses Odere of professional misconduct arising from an alleged conflict of interest, the lawyer insists the decision is both legally unsound and procedurally defective. He argues that the allegations have previously been scrutinised and rejected by the High Court and that the disciplinary proceedings culminated in a decision rendered without affording him a fair opportunity to defend himself.
Appeal Filed Before High Court
Documents filed before the High Court indicate that the appeal arises from Law Council Disciplinary Cause No. LCD 15/2010, Mukesh Shukla versus Charles Odere.
In a Notice of Appeal dated 18 May 2026, Odere states that he is dissatisfied with the entire decision of the Law Council’s Disciplinary Committee and intends to challenge it before the High Court pursuant to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 2023.
The notice was filed through Tusasirwe & Co. Advocates, acting on behalf of Odere.
The filing transforms what had initially appeared to be a disciplinary matter into a broader legal contest over due process, regulatory fairness and the proper interpretation of conflict-of-interest rules governing advocates.
The 16-Year Property War
The conflict began with a protracted dispute between businessman Mukesh Shukla and his Shumuk Group against the late Dr. Bonny Mwebesa Katatumba over the sale of two prime assets, specifically Blacklines House on Colville Street and Hotel Diplomat in Muyenga. These properties were governed by a sale agreement dated August 16, 2008, but according to Odere, the Shumuk Group breached this contract by failing to pay the full balance of the purchase price, a sum that allegedly remains unpaid to this day.
Throughout these proceedings, Odere served as the lead counsel for Dr. Katatumba and ensured full transparency by registering his professional retainer agreement with the Law Council of Uganda.
In 2010, Mukesh Shukla filed disciplinary complaints against all advocates representing the Katatumbas, including Odere. Parallel to these complaints, Shukla initiated several civil suits against Odere and the legal team, all of which were eventually dismissed with costs.
A significant development occurred in Taxation Application No. 302 of 2023 (arising from Civil Suit No. 0314 of 2018), where the High Court Land Division ordered a Shumuk-associated entity to pay over UGX 173 million in costs to the Katatumba family and their legal team. The court valued the subject matter of that specific litigation at approximately UGX 7.7 billion.
On April 30, 2026—sixteen years after the initial complaint—the Law Council Disciplinary Committee issued a 12-month suspension against Odere. The suspension was based on a finding of professional misconduct, specifically a conflict of interest.
The Committee alleged that Odere had a personal financial interest as a creditor in the properties being litigated. Odere strongly disputes this, arguing that receiving payments to satisfy a debt owed to his client does not constitute a personal conflict, and notes that the High Court had already dismissed this specific allegation in previous proceedings.
Procedural Injustices and Contradictory Findings
According to the notice, Odere’s primary grievance centres on the “in absentia” nature of the proceedings. Despite his active cooperation with the Law Council as recently as March 2023, he asserts that no notice of the final hearing was ever served upon him. He only learned of the 12-month suspension through a colleague and subsequent newspaper publications, which he argues deprived him of his fundamental right to a fair defence.
Furthermore, Odere points to internal contradictions within the Committee’s own findings. The Law Council reportedly vindicated his conduct on the merits of the case—declining to find that he advised his client to disregard court orders or conducted illegal evictions—yet simultaneously held that he was conflicted. Odere argues that because the Committee accepted that he received payments legitimately in satisfaction of a debt, these same payments cannot logically be framed as a disqualifying personal interest.
As he prepares his appeal on both procedural and substantive grounds, Odere has reassured his clients and the public that Landwell Advocates & Solicitors remains fully operational. The firm is currently advising clients on the management and continuity of their matters in accordance with Law Council directives while the challenge to the suspension moves forward in the
What’s Next
The High Court is now expected to become the next battleground in a dispute that has already traversed multiple legal forums over the past sixteen years.
For Odere, the appeal represents an opportunity to challenge both the factual basis of the Law Council’s findings and the procedures that produced them.
For the legal profession, the case could provide further judicial guidance on conflicts of interest, disciplinary standards and the procedural safeguards that must accompany professional sanctions.
Meanwhile, Landwell Advocates & Solicitors says it remains operational and continues to advise clients while the appeal process unfolds.
With a formal Notice of Appeal already on record, attention will now shift to the High Court, where one of Uganda’s longest-running legal disputes appears set to enter yet another chapter.
