[2015] EACJ 22
The court found that the applicant and his counsel were duly served with notice of hearing but failed to appear or provide any explanation for their absence. This conduct indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the application. In the absence of a specific rule governing such situations, the court relied on Rule...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] EACJ 22
- Parties
- Applicant: Timothy Alvin Kahoho; Respondent: Secretary General of the East African Community
- Court
- East African Court of Justice
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Application 2 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Application for Review of Appellate Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs for non-appearance of applicant
- Judges
- Nkurunziza JA
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Non Appearance, Application for Review, Costs Award
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Timothy Alvin Kahoho
Applicant
Secretary General of the East African Community
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Review of Appellate Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for review should be dismissed due to non-appearance of the applicant and his counsel.
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded to the respondent upon dismissal for non-appearance.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant and his counsel were duly served with notice of hearing but failed to appear or provide any explanation for their absence. This conduct indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the application. In the absence of a specific rule governing such situations, the court relied on Rule 1(2) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2013, to dismiss the application with costs. The court emphasized that the ends of justice require dismissal for non-appearance, but the applicant retains liberty to apply for re-institution of the application.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs for non-appearance of applicant
Orders
- The application for review is dismissed for non-appearance of the applicant.
- Costs are awarded to the respondent under Rule 1(2) of the Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
## IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE (APPELLATE DIVISION) **AT ARUSHA**
(Coram: Liboire Nkurunziza, VP; Edward Rutakangwa, JA; and Aaron Ringera, JA)
## Application No. 2 of 2015
[An Application for Review arising from the Judgment of the Appellate Division of the Court at Arusha before Hon. Justice Liboire Nkurunziza, VP, Hon. Justices James Ogoola and Aaron Ringera, JJA) in Appeal No. 2 of 2013 dated 28<sup>th</sup> December, 2014]
TIMOTHY ALVIN KAHOHO ..................................
**VERSUS**
## SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE
EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY ....................................
$\alpha$
$\mathbf{1}$
## ORDER OF THE COURT
- 1. This Application for Review of the Court's Judgment dated 28<sup>th</sup> December, 2014, in Appeal No. 2 of 2013, was scheduled for hearing today. However, when the same was called on for hearing, only Mr. Antony Kafumbe, learned Counsel for the Respondent, was in attendance. Neither the Applicant in person, who was duly served with today's notice of hearing, nor his Counsel, Mr. Emmanuel Augustino, entered appearance. Their absence was not accounted for in any way. - 2. Mr. Kafumbe, in the circumstances, was of the view, and rightly so in our considered opinion, that the Applicant has lost interest in his case. For this reason, he urged us to dismiss the Application with costs, under Rule 1 (2) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2013 ("the Rules"). He predicated his prayer on Rule 1 (2) of the Rules, because there is no specific provision in the Rules governing this situation. - 3. On our part, having considered the facts before us, we have found ourselves inclined to accede to Mr. Kafumbe's prayer: The Applicant was undeniably duly served and in good time. He has failed to account to the Court for his absence and that of his Counsel. What further evidence do we need to establish that the Applicant is no longer interested in prosecuting his case.
$\overline{2}$
$\alpha$
- 4. The ends of justice, therefore, dictate that this Application be dismissed for non appearance of the Applicant. - 5. All said and done, we hereby dismiss the Application with costs under Rule $1(2)$ of the Rules. The Applicant is at liberty to apply for its re-institution.
WE SO ORDER.
**DATED** at Arusha, this 9<sup>th</sup> day of November, 2015.
**CRUID** Libóire Nkurunziza
**VICE PRESIDENT**
Spuffer
**Edward Rutakangwa JUSTICE OF APPEAL**
**Aaron Ringera JUSTICE OF APPEAL**