Wakilii

Ex Parte - Avocats Sans Frontières (Appeal 1 of 2022)

East African Court of Justice · [2023] EACJ 4 · 2023 Appeal Dismissed — Lack of Jurisdiction AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from decision of Principal Judge declining leave to appear as amicus curiae
Decision
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; matter should have been brought before Full Court of First Instance Division under Rule 69(3)

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 Appellate Division dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The Court held that a decision by the Principal Judge sitting as a single judge under Rule 60(2) on an application for leave to appear as amicus curiae is not a decision of the First Instance Division and therefore not appealable to the Appellate Division. The proper remedy for a party dissatisfied with such a decision is to apply under Rule 69(3) to have it varied, discharged, or reversed by a Full Court of the First Instance Division within seven days.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; matter should have been brought before Full Court of First Instance Division under Rule 69(3)

Facts

Avocats Sans Frontières (ASF) applied on 6 May 2021 to appear as amicus curiae in Reference No. 39 of 2020 before the East African Court of Justice. The application was filed by notice of motion under the repealed 2013 Rules, though the 2019 Rules (in force since February 2020) required applications for amicus curiae status to be made by letter to the President or Principal Judge. The Principal Judge considered the application on its merits despite the procedural irregularity and declined it by letter dated 15 December 2021, finding that ASF lacked neutrality due to its previous work analyzing oil and gas activities in Tunisia, which related to the subject matter of Reference No. 39 of 2020. ASF filed a notice of appeal on 15 March 2022 and a memorandum of appeal on 1 April 2022, challenging the Principal Judge's decision on grounds including alleged errors of law regarding neutrality, expertise, public interest, and procedural fairness.

Issues

  1. Whether the Appellate Division has jurisdiction to hear this Appeal.
  2. Whether the Principal Judge erred by declining to grant the Appellant leave to appear as amicus curiae.
  3. Whether the procedure prescribed by Rule 60 of the East African Court of Justice Rules of the Court, 2019 for application for leave to appear as amicus curiae contravenes Article 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.
  4. What remedies should the court grant.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction of the Appellate Division.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appellate Jurisdiction — Appealability of Single Judge Decisions — Amicus Curiae Applications
A decision by the Principal Judge sitting as a single judge under Rule 60(2) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of the Court, 2019, granting or denying leave to appear as amicus curiae is not a decision of the First Instance Division and is therefore not appealable to the Appellate Division under Article 35A of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.
Civil Procedure — Remedy Against Single Judge Decisions — Application to Full Court
Where a party is dissatisfied with a decision of a single judge on an interlocutory matter or an application for leave to appear as amicus curiae, the proper remedy is to apply under Rule 69(3) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of the Court, 2019, to have the decision varied, discharged, or reversed by a Full Court of the First Instance Division within seven days, not to appeal directly to the Appellate Division.
Civil Procedure — Quorum of First Instance Division — Single Judge Powers
Applications for leave to appear as amicus curiae do not fall within the matters to be heard by the First Instance Division sitting with a quorum of three or five judges under Rule 69(1), nor do they appear among the specific interlocutory applications listed in Rule 69(2) that may be determined by a single judge, but are instead governed by the special procedure in Rule 60(2) which permits the President or Principal Judge to grant or deny such leave.

Cases cited (2)

  • Attorney General of Kenya v Prof. Anyang' Nyong'o & 10 Others (Appeal No. 1 of 2009)
  • Angella Amudo v Secretary General of EAC (Appeal No. 4 of 2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ex Parte - Avocats Sans Frontières (Appeal 1 of 2022) [2023] EACJ 4 (24 February 2023)
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.