Wakilii

Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda v Makala (Application 2 of 2022)

East African Court of Justice · [2022] EACJ 37 · 2022 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application challenging institution of appeal without payment of security for costs
Decision
Application dismissed; appeal deemed properly instituted despite non-payment of security for costs

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that while the Registrar lacked power to exempt a party from paying security for costs required under Rule 96(1)(c) of the Court Rules, the Respondent who relied in good faith on the Registrar's exemption should not be penalised. In the interest of justice, the appeal was deemed properly instituted. The Court declined to strike out the Notice and Record of Appeal.

Outcome

Application dismissed; appeal deemed properly instituted despite non-payment of security for costs

Facts

The Respondent filed an appeal (Appeal No. 4 of 2020) against a judgment of the First Instance Division. Before filing, he wrote to the Registrar on 17 July 2020 requesting exemption from paying USD 500 security for costs, explaining he could not afford it. On 20 July 2020, the Registrar granted the exemption and allowed him to proceed without depositing security. The Applicant challenged the institution of the appeal, arguing that Rule 96(1)(c) of the Court Rules requires payment of USD 500 as security for costs and that the Registrar had no power to waive this requirement. The Respondent argued he complied with the Rules by relying on the Registrar's exemption granted in good faith.

Issues

  1. Whether the Respondent complied with the Rules of the Court in instituting Appeal No. 4 of 2020.
  2. Whether the Registrar has powers to dispense with the requirements of Rule 96(1)(c).
  3. What are the remedies entitled to parties.

Orders

  • The appeal is deemed to have been filed in accordance with the Rules of the Court.
  • The Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal filed by the Respondent in Appeal No. 4 of 2020 are not struck out.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Security for Costs — Mandatory Requirement
Rule 96(1)(c) of the East African Court of Justice Rules requires an appellant to pay Five Hundred United States Dollars as security for costs when instituting an appeal. The only exception is where the claimant is a Partner State, the Secretary General, or any institution of the Community as provided under Rule 131(1).
Administrative Law — Powers of Court Officials — Registrar's Powers — Limits
The Registrar of the East African Court of Justice does not have powers under the Treaty or the Court Rules to unilaterally exempt a party from payment of security for costs required under Rule 96(1)(c). Only the Court itself has power to decide on exemption from payment of security for costs under Rule 131.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers of Court — Interest of Justice
Where a party relies in good faith on an exemption granted by a court official, even if that official lacked power to grant the exemption, the party should not be penalised. The court may invoke its inherent powers under Rule 4 to prevent injustice and deem proceedings properly instituted in the interest of justice.

Cases cited (1)

  • Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda v Johnson Akol Omunyokol (Application No. 10 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda v Makala (Application 2 of 2022) [2022] EACJ 37 (2 December 2022)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.