Microsoft Word - Casebook on Environmental law

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 92 OF 2004

(ARISING FROM MISC. CAUSE No. 15 OF 2004)

GREENWATCH................................................... APPLICANT
VERSUS

1. UGANDA WILDLIFE AUTHORITY


2. ATTORNEY GENERAL.................................... RESPONDENT

BEFORE: THE HON. JUSTICE GIDEON TINYINONDI

Constitutional Law: Article 50(1), (4) public interest litigation procedure
Civil Procedure: Order 37 Rule 2, 3 9 temporary injunction
Whether the applicant is likely to succeed in the main suit
Civil Procedure: Whether the applicant was required to serve the respondent with
a 45 days statutory notice as provided by the Government
Proceedings Act.

In this application the applicant sought an order for temporary injunction against the respondents
restraining them from exporting or relocating any chimpanzee from Uganda to the Peoples
Republic of China or any other place or country in the world. When the matter came up for
hearing, counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection to strike out the application on
the basis that, the respondents were not issued with a statutory notice as required by the
Government Proceedings Act.

HELD:

1. Applications pursuant to Article 50 must be strictly restricted to the Civil Procedure Act
   and Rules and not S.1 Act 20 of 1969.


2. The damage complained of is of a material nature which would not adequately be
   compensated by award of damages.


3. To demand from an aggrieved party a 45 days notice, is to condemn them to infringement
   of their rights and freedoms for that period.

Objection overruled application to proceed on merit.

Editorial Notes: The main applicant was never heard. It is still pending. Parties agreed to settle
the matter amicably by the respondent conceding UWA is only a trustee and does not own
wildlife and as such had no right to export wildlife.