Wakilii

Byaruhanga Mohammed Selabira v Alkareb Limited and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No 227 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 227 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enforcement of human rights under Articles 22, 26, 50 and 126(2) of the Constitution, seeking declarations and damages for alleged infringement of right to life and right to information
Decision
Application dismissed with costs to the Respondents

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 High Court dismissed the application seeking declarations and damages for alleged infringement of the right to life and right to information of a deceased migrant worker. The court held that once the worker absconded from her employment in Saudi Arabia, the recruiting agency was relieved of direct supervisory obligations. No breach of duty was established against the respondents, as the deceased became a free agent after abandoning the employment arrangement. The respondents' voluntary efforts to repatriate the remains demonstrated they performed any residual responsibility generously.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs to the Respondents

Facts

The applicant's sister, Nyakato Shamirah, was externalized by the first respondent to Saudi Arabia for domestic work in December 2020 under a two-year contract. On 1 September 2021, she absconded from her employer. She maintained contact with her family until August 2024, when communication ceased. An unknown person informed the family of her death on 24 September 2024. The applicant approached the respondents, who confirmed the death and assisted with repatriation. Medical reports indicated the cause of death as acute lung thrombosis, brain hemorrhage, and cardiac arrest. The respondents contributed financially to repatriate the body, which arrived in Uganda on 2 November 2024 and was handed over to the family for burial.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has locus standi to bring this Application?
  2. Whether the Applicant has a cause of action against the Respondents?
  3. Whether the Respondents infringed on the right to life of Shamirah?
  4. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the remedies sought?

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Locus Standi — Constitutional Applications — Standing of Family Members
Article 50(2) of the Constitution confers on any person the right to bring an action for the violation of human rights on behalf of themselves or on behalf of another person. The law does not preclude people justifiably affected by the cause from bringing an action for enforcement or protection of rights. Close biological or blood relatives have standing to pursue actions on behalf of deceased relatives for the protection and enforcement of their rights without requiring express written authority in the form of a power of attorney.
Migrant Workers — Duty of Care — Scope of Recruiting Agency's Liability
Once an externalized migrant worker absconds from lawful employment arranged by a recruiting agency, the agency is relieved of direct supervisory obligations, save to notify the relevant authorities. The recruiting agency's liability does not extend to events occurring after the worker becomes a free agent by abandoning the employment arrangement, absent proof of intentional conduct or omission constituting a breach of a recognized legal duty.
Right to Life — Burden of Proof — Proximate Cause
For a claim under the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 to be sustained, the applicant must demonstrate that the alleged infringement was a direct and proximate cause of the respondent's intentional conduct or omission, and arose from a duty recognized in law. Broad, generalized or speculative allegations do not meet the constitutional threshold for establishing a violation of the right to life.
Remedies — Precondition for Award of Damages
Remedies under Article 50(1) of the Constitution, including compensation, can only issue where a legal wrong has been established. An applicant must prove that the respondent was liable for the causes that the application seeks to remedy or the loss suffered. Where no breach of duty has been proved, the applicant has no enforceable claim for damages.

Legislation cited (15)

Cases cited (13)

  • Dima Domnis Poro v Inyani Godfrey and Another (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2016)
  • Njau & Ors V City Council of Nairobi [1976-1985] 1 EA 397 at 407
  • The Women's Pro Bono Initiative (WPI) and Another v Transcend Agencies International Ltd and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 190 of 2020)
  • Auto Garage V Motokov [1971] EA 514
  • Joseph Mangafu and Others v Angilis Ranch 20 & 21 Ltd and Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 11 of 2020)
  • Centre for Law and Peace Uganda and 3 Others v Bank of Uganda and Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 370 of 2017)
  • Attorney General v Susan Kigula and 417 Others (Constitutional Appeal No. 03 of 2006)
  • Attorney General v Salvatori Abuki (Constitutional Appeal No. 01 of 1998)
  • Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) & Anor V The Executive Director, Mulago National Referral Hospital & Anor
  • Pentecostal Assemblies of God Limited Versus Pentecostal Assemblies of God Lira Ltd & Anor
  • Dr. Denis Lwamafa Versus Attorney General
  • Kasozi v Nsubuga [1985 HCB 43]
  • Charles Onyango Obbo and Another v Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 2002)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Byaruhanga Mohammed Selabira v Alkareb Limited and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No 227 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 227 (15 December 2025)
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.