Uganda Case Law

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda (Reference No.16 of 2020) [2024] EACJ 8 (10 October 2024) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Reference No.16 of 2020

Judge

Gacuko J, Masara PJ, Muhumuza J, Nyawello DPJ, Rene J

The Court found that the Reference was fatally defective because it was supported by an affidavit deponed by the 1st Applicant on behalf of the 2nd Applicant without any resolution or documentation demonstrating authority as required by Rule 19(5) of the Rules. The absence of such authority rendered the affidavit invalid. Furthermore, Rule 25(3) mandates that a Reference challenging the legality of an act must be accompanied by a valid affidavit. The Court had previously struck out a similar affidavit in Application No. 16 of 2020 for the same defect. The Court held that affidavits are eviden…

Source excerpt

• Locus Standi
• Affidavit Requirements
• Environmental Protection
• Indigenous Rights
• Natural Heritage Sites
• Compensation Claims

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda (Application No.16 of 2020)

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda (Application No.16 of 2020) [2021] EACJ 10 (25 November 2021) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Application No.16 of 2020

Judge

Masara PJ, Muhumuza J, Ngiye DPJ, Nyachae J, Wejuli J

The Court held that the 1st Applicant lacked locus standi to represent the 2nd Applicant in the absence of a resolution under seal authorizing him to act, as required by Rule 19(5) of the Rules. Consequently, the 2nd Applicant was struck off as a party. The supporting affidavit, being jointly sworn on behalf of both Applicants, was incurably defective and could not be severed or salvaged. Without a valid affidavit, the Application was unsupported by evidence, contravening Rule 52(5) of the Rules. The Court found the Application incompetent and dismissed it in its entirety, awarding costs to t…

Source excerpt

• Interim Injunctions
• Locus Standi
• Affidavit Requirements
• Environmental Protection
• Ancestral Land Rights

Collectif Des Anciens Travailleurs De La Semico Tabakoto v Republic of Mali

Collectif Des Anciens Travailleurs De La Semico Tabakoto v Republic of Mali [2020] AfCHPR 12 (27 November 2020)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Judge

Aboud J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J

The African Court held it had jurisdiction over the application but found it inadmissible because the applicants’ representative lacked a valid mandate before the Court.

• Access To Court
• Right To Health
• Environmental Protection
• Legal Personality
• Effective Remedy
• Access-to-court

A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania v African Network For Animal Welfare (Appeal 3 of 2014)

A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania v African Network For Animal Welfare (Appeal 3 of 2014) [2014] EACJ 56 (29 July 2014) (Appellate Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Appeal 3 of 2014

Judge

Ugirashebuja P

The Appellate Division held that the Trial Court did not err in enforcing Articles 111-114 of the EAC Treaty, as these provisions are self-executing and enforceable without the need for an operationalizing protocol. The Court's jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Treaty is clear, and the absence of a protocol does not suspend the effectiveness of these provisions. The Trial Court also did not err in considering the reference, as the issue of 'mere proposal' was not properly raised at trial and is a matter of fact, not law, which the Appellate Division cannot review. The Court further affi…

Source excerpt

• Treaty Interpretation
• Environmental Protection
• Injunctive Relief
• Jurisdiction Of Regional Courts

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Republic of Kenya (Application No. 006/2012)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Republic of Kenya (Application No. 006/2012) [2013] AfCHPR 10 (15 March 2013)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 006/2012

Judge

and Robert ENO - Registrar.

The African Court granted provisional measures in a case brought by the African Commission over threatened eviction and land transactions affecting the Ogiek of the Mau Forest.

• Indigenous Rights
• Eviction And Displacement
• Right To Property
• Cultural Rights
• Provisional Measures
• Environmental Protection

Africa Network For Animal Welfare v A.G. of Tanzania

Africa Network For Animal Welfare v A.G. of Tanzania (Reference 9 of 2010) [2011] EACJ 51 (29 August 2011) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Reference 9 of 2010

Judge

Arach-Amoko JA, Busingye PJ, Butasi JA, Lenaola JA, Mkwawa JA

The East African Court of Justice overruled Tanzania’s preliminary objections, holding it had jurisdiction, the reference was timely, and permanent injunctions were not barred.

• Jurisdiction Of Regional Courts
• Permanent Injunctions
• Treaty Interpretation
• Limitation Periods
• Environmental Protection
• Procedural Compliance

ANAW v A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania

ANAW v A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania (Reference 9 of 2010) [2011] EACJ 9 (29 August 2011) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Reference 9 of 2010

Judge

Arach-Amoko DPJ, Busingye PJ, Butasi J, Lenaola J, Mkwawa J

The East African Court of Justice dismissed preliminary objections in ANAW’s reference over a Serengeti road project, finding jurisdiction, timeliness, and procedure satisfied.

• Treaty Interpretation
• Jurisdiction Of Regional Courts
• Environmental Protection
• Limitation Of Actions
• Treaty-interpretation
• Jurisdiction

Greenwatch v Uganda Wildlife Authority & Anor

Greenwatch v Uganda Wildlife Authority & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No.92 of 2004) [2004] UGHCCD 5 (28 April 2004)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No.92 of 2004

Judge

Tinyinondi, J

The High Court overruled a preliminary objection that statutory notice was required before an Article 50 rights claim seeking to stop chimpanzee exports.

• Temporary Injunction
• Statutory Notice Requirement
• Enforcement Of Fundamental Rights
• Environmental Protection
• Ultra Vires Actions
• Balance Of Convenience