Wakilii

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda (Reference No.16 of 2020)

East African Court of Justice · [2024] EACJ 8 · 2024 Reference Dismissed 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 alleged violations of environmental and human rights provisions
Decision
Reference dismissed on procedural grounds for being supported by an incurably defective affidavit

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 dismissed the Reference on procedural grounds. The first applicant lacked authority to represent the second applicant (a corporate entity) when deponing the supporting affidavit, contrary to Rule 19(5) which requires a resolution under seal. Without a valid supporting affidavit, the Reference could not be sustained under Rule 25(3). The Court refused the applicant's request to file a supplementary affidavit, holding that affidavits are evidence and not amenable to amendment.

Outcome

Reference dismissed on procedural grounds for being supported by an incurably defective affidavit

Facts

In 2019, the Government of Uganda through the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development contracted with Royal Techno Industries Limited to drill for geothermal energy at Kibiro Hot Springs Village in Hoima District. The applicants alleged that on 29 March 2020, an accidental discharge of drilling fluids occurred causing environmental damage. The first applicant, Adam Kyomuhendo, filed a Reference on behalf of himself and the Indigenous Peoples Strategy Forum seeking declarations that the geothermal project violated environmental and human rights provisions of the EAC Treaty and the African Charter. The Reference was supported by a joint affidavit deponed by the first applicant on his own behalf and purportedly on behalf of the second applicant (a corporate entity), without any resolution or documentation demonstrating his authority to represent the organisation.

Issues

  1. Whether the Reference was properly filed in accordance with the provisions of Rules 19(5) and 25(3) of the East African Court of Justice Rules 2019.

Orders

  • Reference dismissed in its entirety.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Locus Standi — Corporate Representation — Authority to Represent
A corporation or company may appear before the East African Court of Justice by its director, manager or company secretary only where such person is appointed by a resolution under the seal of the corporation or company, or the corporation may be represented by an advocate.
Civil Procedure — Affidavits — Defective Affidavits — Authority to Depose
Where a person purports to depose an affidavit on behalf of a legal persona without the requisite authority, the affidavit is incurably defective and invalid, and cannot support proceedings before the court.
Civil Procedure — References — Supporting Affidavits — Mandatory Requirements
Where a reference seeks to challenge the legality of an act, regulation, directive, decision or action, the statement of reference must be accompanied by an affidavit. Without a valid supporting affidavit, the reference cannot be sustained.
Civil Procedure — Amendment — Affidavits — Evidence Not Amenable to Amendment
Affidavits are evidence and as such are not amenable to amendment. A party cannot cure a defective affidavit by seeking leave to file a supplementary or replacement affidavit after the defect has been identified.

Legislation cited (8)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Articles 5(1), 5(3)(a), 5(3)(c), 6(d), 7(1)(a), 7(2), 8(1)(a), 8(1)(c), 23, 27, 30, 38(2), 39, 111, 114, 119(c), 119(f), 123(3)(c), 130(1), 130(4)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 4
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 19(5)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 25
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 25(3)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 27
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 127(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights Articles 2, 8, 14, 16, 17(2), 17(3), 21, 22, 24

Cases cited (4)

  • Kalenga and Others v Minister of Urban and Rural Development and Others (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 219 of 2019)
  • Dr Ally Possi and Another v Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum (HRAPF) and Another (EACJ Application No. 1 of 2015)
  • Attorney General of Uganda v Media Legal Defence Initiative (MDLI) and 19 Others (EACJ Appeal No. 3 of 2016)
  • Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi v Secretary General of the East African Community and Another (EACJ Appeal No. 2 of 2019)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kyomuhendo and Another v Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda (Reference No.16 of 2020) [2024] EACJ 8 (10 October 2024)
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.