[2015] EACJ 79

[2015] EACJ 79

The Court held that since the application for discontinuance was made without prior notice to the Respondents and considering the time and effort expended by the Respondents in preparing pleadings and conducting research, it was just and proper to award costs to the Respondents. The Reference was therefore marked as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EACJ 79
Parties
Applicant: Ally Hatibu Msangi; Applicant: David Geoffrey Makatha; Applicant: John Adama Busemba; Respondent: The Secretary General of the East African Community; Respondent: The Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya; Respondent: The Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda; Respondent: The Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda
Court
East African Court of Justice
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Reference 9 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Reference / Ruling on Discontinuance
Outcome
Reference discontinued by consent with costs to the Respondents.
Judges
Butasi JA
Legal Topics
Discontinuance of Proceedings, Costs Award, Consent Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Discontinuance of Proceedings Costs Award Consent Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ally Hatibu Msangi

Applicant

David Geoffrey Makatha

Applicant

John Adama Busemba

Applicant

The Secretary General of the East African Community

Respondent

The Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya

Respondent

The Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda

Respondent

The Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference / Ruling on Discontinuance

  1. 1 Whether the Reference should be discontinued by consent of the parties.
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded to the Respondents upon discontinuance.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that since the application for discontinuance was made without prior notice to the Respondents and considering the time and effort expended by the Respondents in preparing pleadings and conducting research, it was just and proper to award costs to the Respondents. The Reference was therefore marked as discontinued by consent of the parties, with costs to the Respondents, pursuant to Rule 51(1)(b) of the Court's Rules of Procedure.

Court Disposition

Reference discontinued by consent with costs to the Respondents.

Orders

  • Reference No. 09 of 2013 is marked as discontinued under Rule 51(1)(b) of the Court's Rules of Procedure.
  • Costs are awarded to the Respondents.