A Legal Analysis of the Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Resolving Small Claims Disputes in Uganda

Alternative dispute resolution can make low value civil disputes easier to resolve, but a settlement is not necessarily fair, enforceable or less costly than adjudication. This article examines the role of ADR within Uganda's small claims procedure through doctrinal analysis and a focused documentary review. It considers the constitutional framework, principal statutes, small claims rules, the 2026 court-annexed mediation rules and eleven selected judicial decisions. Official Judiciary publications provide contextual administrative evidence. The analysis finds that the strongest legal contribution of ADR lies in connecting early communication and proportionate settlement opportunities with a reliable route back to court. Negotiation, mediation, conciliation and arbitration must be distinguished because they allocate decision making authority differently and produce outcomes with different legal consequences. Constitutional and subsequent litigation also demonstrate that simplified procedure cannot be assessed without attention to representation, evidence and access to corrective remedies. Officially reported small claims disposals increased from 23,567 in financial year 2023/24 to 24,976 in 2024/25, but the available aggregate figures do not establish how many outcomes were caused by ADR. The article proposes a pathway linking jurisdictional screening, informed referral, neutral assistance, precise settlement terms, adjudication where necessary and verified compliance. It recommends updated public guidance, proportionate costs, accessible advice, mediator accountability and reporting that separates settlement from other forms of disposal. The findings are a legal and documentary synthesis; no new interviews, surveys or court file measurements were conducted.