Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Haidara and Others v Republic of Mali (Ruling) (Application No. 009/2024) [2024] AfCHPR 35 (29 October 2024)
The African Court granted provisional measures in favor of three Malian applicants, ordering suspension of their detention so they could receive specialised medical care.
Center for Health, Human Rights & Development (CEHURD) v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition 8 of 2019) [2024] UGCC 14 (13 May 2024)
The court found that while the petition initially raised substantial constitutional questions regarding the validity of various provisions of the Venereal Diseases Act, Cap 284, the Act was repealed by Section 97 of the Public Health (Amendment) Act, 2023, during the pendency of the proceedings. As a result, the issues in controversy ceased to exist, rendering the petition moot. The court relied on established legal principles that a case is moot when there is no longer a live controversy or cognizable interest in the outcome, and that jurisdiction may abate if the law in question is repealed…
Source excerpt
Health Equity and Policy Initiative (HEAPI) v Hon. Dr. Jane Ruth Aceng Ocero , Minister of Health & Attorney General of Uganda (Miscellaneous Cause 210 of 2018) [2024] UGHCCD 24 (16 January 2024)
The court found that the Respondents, by failing to enact binding legislation to regulate and standardize levies, rates, and pricing of medical services in private health facilities, have violated and continue to threaten the right to health of patients in Uganda. The existing guidelines and codes lack punitive force and do not substitute for statutory regulation. The court took judicial notice of the notorious disparities and abuses in private health charges and held that the state has a constitutional and international obligation to ensure accessibility and affordability of health services.…
Source excerpt
Center For Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and Others v Uganda National Health Research Organization (UNHRO) and Others (Miscellaneous Application 439 of 2019) [2023] UGHCCD 288 (29 September 2023)
The court found that the affidavits supporting the application contained substantial hearsay and lacked personal knowledge, as the deponents were not medical professionals nor directly involved in the COAST trial. After striking out the offending paragraphs, the remaining evidence was insufficient to support the application. The court also determined that, although the COAST trial had been halted, the absence of a permanent injunction did not render the matter entirely moot, but the application could not succeed on the merits due to evidentiary deficiencies. Consequently, the application was…
Source excerpt
Ghannouchi and Others v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 004/2023) [2023] AfCHPR 19 (28 August 2023)
The African Court granted provisional measures in part, ordering Tunisia to remove barriers to lawyers and doctors and disclose detention grounds, but refused release.
Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 004/2020) [2022] AfCHPR 60 (15 August 2022)
The African Court granted provisional measures only on access to medical care and release of the Applicant’s medical file, dismissing the remaining requests.
Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 004/2020) [2021] AfCHPR 20 (22 November 2021)
The African Court largely dismissed Benin provisional-measures requests, but ordered disclosure of an expert report and issuance of a valid national identity card.
Collectif Des Anciens Travailleurs De La Semico Tabakoto v Republic of Mali [2020] AfCHPR 12 (27 November 2020)
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.
Collectif des Anciens Travailleurs du Laboratoire ALS v Republic of Mali (Application No. 042/2016) [2019] AfCHPR 8 (28 March 2019)
The Court found that the Applicants, as a group of individuals, have legal standing to file the Application, given Mali’s deposit of the Article 34(6) Declaration. However, the Application was declared inadmissible because the Applicants failed to exhaust available local remedies. Specifically, they did not pursue an appeal to the investigating judge or file a civil suit as provided under Mali’s Code of Criminal Procedure, which the Court has previously recognized as effective and satisfactory remedies. The Applicants’ argument that local remedies were unduly prolonged was rejected, as they d…
Source excerpt
Kemboge v Tanzania (Application No. 002/2016) [2018] AfCHPR 10 (11 May 2018)
The Court found that the Applicant had exhausted local remedies by appealing to the highest court in Tanzania and that a constitutional petition was not a remedy he was required to pursue. On the merits, the Court held that the Applicant failed to substantiate how the refusal of the Court of Appeal to consider certain grounds of appeal amounted to a violation of his right to equality before the law. The Court also found no evidence that the Respondent State's refusal to recognize the Applicant's alleged marriage to the victim violated his right to health. Accordingly, the Court dismissed all…
Source excerpt
