Kampala, Uganda.
The Government of the United Kingdom has been allowed to challenge a 2019 court ruling which stripped it of diplomatic immunity in a property dispute. On the 01st the High Court granted leave to the UK government to appeal a decision by Lady Justice Lydia Mugambe overruled an objection arguing that the suit before the court was a commercial transaction.
In 2016 workers at the British High Commission in Kampala fixed a steel grille in the storm drain on its property blocking the system of the adjacent property owned by a one Kagoro Epima, causing the stormy waters to rise and wash away his property. Kagoro then filed a case in court against the UK Government seeking damages. When the matter came up for hearing, the UK Government raised an objection that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case on grounds of sovereign immunity. Lady Justice Lydia Mugambe however overruled the objection arguing that the suit before the court was a commercial transaction to which restrictive immunity did not apply.
However, the UK Government filed an application in court seeking leave to appeal against the ruling delivered by Lady Justice Lydia Mugambe arguing that she had erred in law when she failed to properly consider and apply the test under the restrictive theory of sovereign immunity doctrine.
While granting the leave the High Court Judge Hon. Justice Esta Nambayo held that there is a need for the appellate court to re-evaluate the evidence on record and come up with its own finding as to whether or not there was a commercial transaction between the parties so that court can be guided on whether or not it has jurisdiction to hear the main suit. Justice Nambayo also stayed proceedings in the main case until the Court of Appeal hears and determines to be and are hereby the appeal.
Under the restrictive theory of sovereign immunity, Uganda, like most countries, allows sovereign states limited immunity from lawsuits in courts. The restrictive theory suggests that a state’s immunity should be waived or limited when it engages in certain commercial activities. Under this principle, a foreign state may be subject to a lawsuit in court if the claim arises out of a commercial activity conducted by the state or its agency.
