Wakilii

Union Trade Centre Limited v A.G. of Rwanda (Appeal 1 of 2015)

East African Court of Justice · [2015] EACJ 13 · 2015 Matter Remitted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from the First Instance Division of the East African Court of Justice dismissing a reference alleging Treaty violations
Decision
Matter remitted to the First Instance Division for hearing de novo with proper evidence

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 remitted the reference back to the First Instance Division for hearing de novo. The Trial Court had proceeded to judgment without requiring the parties to file affidavit evidence, despite having agreed at the scheduling conference that evidence would be by affidavit. This procedural irregularity occasioned grave injustice to both parties, as neither could prove or disprove their cases. The Court invoked its inherent power to remit the matter for proper consideration with evidence.

Outcome

Matter remitted to the First Instance Division for hearing de novo with proper evidence

Facts

Union Trade Centre Limited, a Rwandan company operating a shopping mall in Kigali, filed a reference alleging that the Kigali City Abandoned Property Management Commission wrongfully took over management of its mall by ordering tenants to pay rent into the Commission's account. The Appellant claimed this violated Treaty provisions and caused difficulty in meeting mortgage obligations. The Attorney General of Rwanda responded with preliminary objections on jurisdiction, proper party, and limitation. At the scheduling conference, the parties agreed evidence would be by affidavit, but no directions were given on filing timelines. The Trial Court proceeded to judgment based solely on written submissions without any affidavit evidence being filed by either party, despite the agreed procedure and the need for factual proof on contested issues including when the cause of action arose.

Issues

  1. Whether the Trial Court erred in law in finding that the Respondent was properly sued.
  2. Whether the Trial Court erred in law in determining whether the cause of action was time barred.
  3. Whether the Trial Court declined to interpret and apply the provisions of the Treaty.

Orders

  • The Reference is remitted back to the Trial Court for hearing de novo after the parties have been afforded an opportunity for due presentation of such relevant evidence as they may have in support of their respective cases, in accordance with such Directions as the Court may give.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs of the Appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Evidence — Affidavit Evidence — Failure to File Despite Agreement
Where parties agree at a scheduling conference that evidence shall be by affidavit, and the court gives directions only on written submissions without specifying timelines for filing affidavits, the subsequent failure of parties to file affidavits and the court's proceeding to judgment without evidence constitutes a grave procedural irregularity occasioning injustice.
Evidence — Proof — Pleadings and Annexures Not Evidence
Pleadings in court are not evidence but averments requiring proof. Annexures to a document are not evidence unless the document is an affidavit to which they are annexed, or they are produced at trial as exhibits. Documents annexed to written submissions cannot be relied upon as evidence.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers — Remittal for Hearing De Novo
A court may invoke its inherent power to remit a matter for hearing de novo where proceeding to judgment without required evidence would condone and perpetuate an irregularity that has occasioned irreparable injustice to the parties, and where such remittal is necessary for the ends of justice.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Shared Responsibility for Procedural Failure
Where a procedural lapse results from both the court's failure to give proper directions and counsel's failure to seek and press for appropriate procedural directions, the just order is that each party should bear its own costs.

Legislation cited (15)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 5(3)(g)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 6(d)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 7(1)(a)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 7(2)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 8(1)(a)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 8(1)(b)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 8(1)(c)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 27
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30(2)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 1(2)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 24
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 24(d)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 30(c)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 94(4)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Union Trade Centre Limited v A.G. of Rwanda (Appeal 1 of 2015) [2015] EACJ 13 (20 November 2015)
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.