Uganda Case Law

Baku Obudra v Attorney General (Misc Cause 264 of 2020)

Baku Obudra v Attorney General (Misc Cause 264 of 2020) [2024] UGHCCD 130 (24 April 2024)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc Cause 264 of 2020

Judge

Nambayo, J

The court found no evidence that the Applicant was discriminated against or denied equal protection under Article 21, nor that his right to a fair hearing under Article 28(1) was violated, as there was no hearing within the constitutional meaning. The right to practice his profession under Article 40(2) was not infringed, as failure to shortlist did not prevent him from continuing his legal practice. The court held that the Judicial Service Commission acted on adverse reports from the Law Council and Uganda Law Society, and the Applicant was subsequently shortlisted after clearance. Allegatio…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Appointments
• Right To Fair Hearing
• Equality And Non Discrimination
• Access To Information
• Professional Practice Rights

Kazooba v M.K Creditors Ltd & Others

Kazooba v M.K Creditors Ltd & Others (Miscellaneous Application 1257 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 37 (4 March 2024)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 1257 of 2022

Judge

Harriet Grace Magala, J

The High Court determined that the constitutional question regarding the appointment and deployment of acting judges had already been conclusively addressed by the Constitutional Court in Constitutional Petition No. 15 of 2022, which found the designation of acting judges for a term of two years to be unconstitutional but did not retrospectively nullify their appointments or judicial acts. The doctrine of res judicata precludes referring the same question to the Constitutional Court again. The High Court is bound by the Constitutional Court's decision under stare decisis, and the pending appe…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Appointments
• Acting Judges
• Constitutional Reference
• Case Consolidation

Attorney General v Kabumba & Another

Attorney General v Kabumba & Another (Constitutional Application 16 of 2022) [2023] UGCC 117 (6 June 2023)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Case number

Constitutional Application 16 of 2022

Judge

Buteera, JCC, Bamugemereire, JCC, Kibeedi Mutangula, JCC, Mulyagonja, JCC, Kihika, JA /JCC

The Constitutional Court found that it has inherent jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution of its own orders, including consequential orders arising from declaratory judgments, in order to protect the right of appeal. The applicant established a prima facie case and likelihood of success on appeal by articulating arguable constitutional questions regarding the President's mandate to appoint acting judges and the interpretation of relevant constitutional provisions. The court held that if a stay is not granted, the appeal may be rendered nugatory, as the regularization of the judges' appoin…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Execution
• Judicial Appointments
• Acting Judges
• Right Of Appeal
• Balance Of Convenience

East Africa Law Society v Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania and Another (Appeal No.2 of 2021)

East Africa Law Society v Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania and Another (Appeal No.2 of 2021) [2022] EACJ 30 (31 August 2022) (Appellate Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Appeal No.2 of 2021

Judge

Kayobera P, M'lnoti JA, Mugeni JA

The Appellate Division upheld the nomination of Judge Sauda Mjasiri to the EACJ, found no Treaty breach, but replaced costs with each party bearing its own.

• Judicial Appointments
• Treaty Interpretation
• Public Participation
• Good Governance
• Judicial Independence
• Judicial-appointments

East Africa Law Society v Attorney General of United Republic of Tanzania and Another

East Africa Law Society v Attorney General of United Republic of Tanzania and Another (Reference No.1 of 2019) [2020] EACJ 16 (25 November 2020) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Reference No.1 of 2019

Judge

Mugenyi PJ, Ngiye J, Nyachae J

The Court held that Article 24 of the Treaty provides two distinct and alternative routes for appointment to the East African Court of Justice: either the nominee fulfills the conditions required in their own country for holding high judicial office, or is a jurist of recognized competence. Justice Mjasiri, though retired from the Tanzanian judiciary, was acknowledged as a jurist of recognized competence and thus qualified under Article 24. The Treaty does not prescribe a uniform or public nomination process, leaving such procedures to the discretion of Partner States as a matter of sovereign…

Source excerpt

• Treaty Interpretation
• Judicial Appointments
• Sovereignty Of Partner States
• Public Participation
• Transparency And Accountability

Ochieng and Anor v A.G. of Uganda

Ochieng and Anor v A.G. of Uganda (Reference 11 of 2013) [2015] EACJ 39 (7 August 2015) (First Instance Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Reference 11 of 2013

Judge

Jundu JA, Lenaola JA, Mugenyi JA

The East African Court of Justice dismissed a challenge over alleged delay in appointing Ugandan judges, finding no proof of refusal or Treaty breach.

• Judicial Appointments
• Separation Of Powers
• Rule Of Law
• Good Governance
• Independence Of Judiciary
• Judicial-appointments

Ochieng and Anor v A.G. of Uganda (Appeal 4 of 2015)

Ochieng and Anor v A.G. of Uganda (Appeal 4 of 2015) [2015] EACJ 99 (7 August 2015) (Appellate Division)

Court

East African Court of Justice

Case number

Appeal 4 of 2015

Judge

Kiryabwire JA, Nkurunziza JA, Ringera JA, Rutakangwa JA, Ugirashebuja P

The Appellate Division found that the Appellants failed to demonstrate any error of law, lack of jurisdiction, or procedural irregularity by the Trial Court as required under Article 35A of the Treaty and Rule 77 of the Rules of the Court. The Appellants' submissions merely reiterated factual arguments from the lower court without identifying or substantiating any legal misdirection or miscarriage of justice. The Trial Court's dismissal was based on lack of evidence regarding the President's alleged refusal to appoint judges, which is a matter of fact not reviewable on appeal. The Appellate D…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Appointments
• Separation Of Powers
• Treaty Interpretation
• Rule Of Law