Wakilii

Grands Lacs Supplier S.A.R.L and Others v Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi

East African Court of Justice · [2018] EACJ 129 · 2018 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Reference filed under the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community challenging the unlawful seizure of goods in transit
Decision
Reference partly allowed with general damages awarded and costs to the Applicants

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 East African Court of Justice held that the seizure of goods in transit by Burundian authorities without due process violated the rule of law principle enshrined in Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. The Court awarded general damages of USD 20,000 with interest at 6% per annum but dismissed the claim for special damages due to insufficient proof. The Court affirmed its jurisdiction to award damages as a remedy for Treaty violations.

Outcome

Reference partly allowed with general damages awarded and costs to the Applicants

Facts

In July 2016, the Applicants sought to transport foodstuffs (maize, beans, cassava) from Tanzania through Burundi to Uganda. The goods were cleared at Kobero border but the Burundi Revenue Authority directed them to exit via Kanyaru-Haut border where a scanner was available. Despite clearance and payment of all transit taxes, on 30 July 2016 the goods were seized by Burundian authorities on instructions of an Advisor to the Ministry of Human Rights. The Burundi Revenue Authority confirmed on 10 August 2016 that no customs infraction had been committed and that the goods had been properly cleared. The goods were subsequently distributed to vulnerable people under a government policy. The Applicants made multiple written appeals for release of the goods to various Burundian authorities but received no satisfactory response.

Issues

  1. Whether the East African Court of Justice has jurisdiction to entertain the Reference.
  2. Whether the Reference is time-barred under Article 30(2) of the Treaty.
  3. Whether the Applicants are entitled to the remedies sought against the Respondent.

Orders

  • Declaration that the decision to seize the Applicants' goods by the Respondent through its organs/agents breaches Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty.
  • Respondent to pay USD 20,000 to the Applicants as general damages.
  • Interest at 6% per annum on the general damages from the date of judgment until full payment.
  • No order as regards special damages claimed by the Applicants.
  • Respondent to pay the costs of the Reference to the Applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Rule of Law — Seizure of Goods — Due Process Requirements
The seizure of goods in transit without compliance with statutory procedures for notice and opportunity to be heard violates the principle of the rule of law enshrined in a treaty establishing a regional economic community.
Administrative Law — State Responsibility — Acts of State Organs
Under international law, the conduct of any organ of a State must be regarded as an act of that State, and the State is responsible for unlawful acts committed by its agents in the exercise of their official functions.
Constitutional Law — Treaty Interpretation — Jurisdiction of Regional Courts
A regional court established by treaty has jurisdiction not only to interpret treaty provisions but also to grant appropriate remedies including damages to ensure adherence to law and compliance with the treaty, as an aspect of its interpretative jurisdiction.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment by International Courts
An award of general damages for non-pecuniary loss is a well-established form of relief in international law, and the quantum falls within the judicial discretion of the court to be exercised judiciously upon the facts and circumstances presented.
Damages & Quantum — Special Damages — Proof Requirements
Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved. Where supporting documents are illegible photocopies and no application is made to compel production of original documents, the court is unable to assess the quantum and the claim for special damages must be dismissed.
Commercial Law — Customs and Excise — Transit Goods — Free Movement
Where goods in transit have been cleared by the customs authority of a Partner State and all requisite transit taxes paid, subsequent seizure by other state organs without following statutory procedures for seizure violates the principle of free movement of goods within a regional economic community.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Articles 3(e), 5(3)(d), 6(d), 7(1)(a)(c), 8(1)(a)&(c), 8(5), 27(1), 29, 30, 38, 71, 75, 76, 105
  • Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community Common Market Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
  • Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community Customs Union Article 39
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure 2013 Rules 1(2), 24, 53
  • East African Community Customs Management Act 2004 s.213
  • East African Community Customs Management Act 2004 s.214

Cases cited (10)

  • Alcon International Limited v Standard Chartered Bank of Uganda and 2 Others (EACJ Appeal No. 3 of 2013)
  • Owners of the Motor Vessels 'Lillian S' vs. Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited
  • Masenge Venant v Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi (EACJ Reference No. 2 of 2012)
  • Ruhara Georges v Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi (EACJ Reference No. 4 of 2014)
  • Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya v Independent Medical Legal Unit (EACJ Appeal No. 1 of 2011)
  • Hon. Dr Margaret Zziwa v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Appeal No. 2 of 2017)
  • Andrea Francovich and Danila Bonifaci vs. Italy (1991) ECR 1-5357
  • Shanique Myrie vs.The State of Barbados, CCJ Application No. OA002 of 2012, [2013] CCJ 3 (OJ)
  • Stanbic Bank Tanzania vs. Abercrombie & Kent (T) Limited, Court of Appeal of Tanzania, Civil Appeal No. 21 of 2001
  • Attorney General vs. Lutaaya, Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2007 (SC)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Grands Lacs Supplier S.A.R.L and Others v Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi [2018] EACJ 129 (19 June 2018)
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.