Share
Zziwa v Secretary General of The East African Community (Application 1 of 2016) [2016] EACJ 114 (18 March 2016) (First Instance Division)
- Citation
- [2016] EACJ 114
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- East African Court of Justice
- Panel
- Lenaola JA
- Case number
- Application 1 of 2016
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- East African Court of Justice
- Panel
- Lenaola JA
- Case number
- Application 1 of 2016
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court held that since the annexures in question were already on the record, the Respondent may raise objections to their admissibility as part of his submissions during the substantive hearing of the Application. The Court will determine the admissibility of the annexures when deciding the Application in its entirety, rather than excluding them at the interlocutory stage. This approach ensures procedural fairness and allows both parties to fully address the issue within the context of the main Application.
Court disposition
Objection deferred; hearing to proceed with annexures on record.
Orders
- The hearing of the Application shall continue with the annexures on record, subject to objections on admissibility to be determined during the substantive hearing.
02
Material facts
Parties
Hon. Dr. Margaret Nantongo Zziwa
Applicant Counsel: Mr. TumwebazeSecretary General of the East African Community
Respondent Counsel: Mr. Stephen Agaba03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Objection Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether annexures to the Applicant's Supplementary Affidavit filed without leave of the East African Legislative Assembly are admissible in evidence.
- 02
Whether S.20 of the EALA (Powers and Privileges) Act 2003 prohibits the filing of such annexures without leave.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Counsel for the Applicant, Mr. Tumwebaze, left the matter of admissibility of the annexures to the Court's discretion and did not make substantive submissions on the objection.
- Respondent
- Counsel for the Respondent, Mr. Stephen Agaba, argued that the annexures to the Applicant's Supplementary Affidavit were obtained and filed without leave of the East African Legislative Assembly, contrary to Section 20 of the EALA (Powers and Privileges) Act 2003, and should therefore not be referenced or admitted.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 20, EALA (Powers and Privileges) Act 2003
Documents obtained from the East African Legislative Assembly require leave for admissibility in proceedings.
- 02
General principles of civil procedure
Objections to admissibility of evidence may be raised and determined during substantive hearing.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court held that since the annexures in question were already on the record, the Respondent may raise objections to their admissibility as part of his submissions during the substantive hearing of the Application. The Court will determine the admissibility of the annexures when deciding the Application in its entirety, rather than excluding them at the interlocutory stage. This approach ensures procedural fairness and allows both parties to fully address the issue within the context of the main Application.
Obiter and limits
- The Court exercised its discretion to allow the hearing to proceed with the annexures on record, subject to future determination of their admissibility.
- Procedural objections regarding evidence should be addressed within the substantive hearing to ensure comprehensive adjudication.
Court disposition
Objection deferred; hearing to proceed with annexures on record.
- The hearing of the Application shall continue with the annexures on record, subject to objections on admissibility to be determined during the substantive hearing.
Source and reliance status
East African Court of Justice
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
East African Court of Justice
Judgment
IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE ATARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION
(Coram: Isaac Lenaola, DPJ; Faustin Ntezilyayo,J; Fakihi A. Jundu,J)
APPLICATION N0.1 OF 2016
(Arising from Reference No.17 of 2014)
HON. DR. MARGARET NANTONGO ZZIWA .......... APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY ... .. .................... RESPONDENT
18TH MARCH 2016
Application No.1 of2016 Page 1
~ - *(*
RULING OF THE COURT
- 1. Mr. Stephen Agaba, Counsel for the Respondent, at the hearing of the Application dated 22nd January, 2015 and filed on 23rd January, 2015 raised an objection to any reference by the Applicant to certain annexures to the Applicant's Supplementary Affidavit sworn on 9 th March, 2015 and filed on the same day. - 2. It is his simple submission that these annexures, having been obtained without leave of the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA) have been filed contrary to S.20 of the EALA (Powers and Privileges) Act 2003. - 3. Mr. Tumwebaze for the Applicant left the matter to the Court's discretion. - 4. Our view is that since the annexures are already on the record, let the Respondent make any objections to the admissibility of the said annexures as part of his submissions on the Application before us and we shall determine the same as we determine the Application in its entirety. - 5. In the event, the hearing of the Application shall continue along those lines. - 6. Orders accordingly.
APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2016 Page 2
µ...u}(. *(*
Dated, Delivered and Signed at Arusha this 18th Day of March 2016.
ISAAC LENAOLA DEPUTY PRINCIPAL JUDGE
F STIN NTEZILYAYO JUDGE
FAKIHI A. JUNDU JUDGE
APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2016
Page 3
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.