Legal News

BEST PRACTICES FOR HOUSE LEGAL WORKSHOP - NAIROBI, AUGUST 5, 2010
The Best Practices for In House Legal is the premier legal and business event for general and legal counsel. The forum to be held in Nairobi on August 5-6, 2010, aims to bring together like-minded individuals to address key management issues at the highest level. This year’s forum organised by Marcus Evans is dedicated towards improving overall efficiency of the legal department. This event will provide a platform for Government bodies, Private companies and solution providers to network and share the latest insights and views relating to in-house legal counsel.

The two day conference will focus on the holistic approach to in-house counsels. It takes into account of managing the department effectively and creating leverage within the organisation. In today’s globalised business world, legal departments have surpassed its traditional role and have become increasingly important to further improves corporate revenues
It further hopes to equip participants with skills on:

Advising the Board of Directors and management on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) issues
• Understanding what a Service Level Agreement (SLA) is, as well as its purpose
• Acknowledging, identifying and mapping various risks in the department
• Improving and mastering effective negotiation skills for enhanced problem solving and more efficient conflict resolution.

The conference which shall feature presentations and cross-cutting edge case studies from regional and international speakers has been endorsed by EALS among other organizations.

Please click here to view the Programme
Please visit the Marcus Evans website for more information: www.marcusevans.com

EACJ ADVISES THAT EAC CAN APPLY VARIABLE GEOMETRY
The First Instance Division of the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) on April 24, 2009 delivered its Advisory Opinion in an Application brought before it by the Counsel to the East African Community (EAC), on behalf of the EAC Council of Ministers. The Council had formally sought the Court’s Opinion on whether the operational principle of Variable Geometry, which is provided for in the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community (the EAC Treaty) is in contradiction with the Treaty requirement that decisions of the EAC organs should be by consensus. In an Opinion delivered by the Principal Judge of the First Instance Division, the Hon. Mr. Justice Johnson Busingye of Rwanda, the Court opined that: -

1. The operational principle of Variable Geometry is in perfect harmony with the requirement of consensus in decision-making at the EAC.
2. The principle of Variable Geometry can and should be applied to guide the regional integration process, the requirement of consensus in decision-making notwithstanding.
3. Consensus does not necessitate unanimity of the Partner States. In other words, no Partner State has a veto power when it comes to decision-making at the EAC.

EACJ HAS NO JURISDICTION IN INAUGURAL COMMERCIAL CASE
.......Court delivers ruling on Feb 12, 2009 as EALS monitors the case

Modern Holdings (EA) Ltd will now have to seek legal redress elsewhere following the ruling by the EACJ delivered on February 12, 2009. EACJ ruled it had no jurisdiction to entertain the reference No.1 of 2008 in which the claimant, Arusha based Modern Holdings Ltd, sued the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) for losses of over $ 24 million on imports ordered from United Arab Emirates through the port of Mombasa.

Delivering the ruling, coram of Judges led by Johnstone Busingye (Principal Judge), Mary Stella Arach-Amoko (Deputy Principal Judge), John Mkwawa, Jean Bosco Butasi and Benjamin Patrick Kubo, stated that the obligation to promote the development of efficient and profitable seaport services enumerated under Article 93 of the EAC Treaty, lay squarely on the shoulders of the Republic of Kenya.

Please click below to view the ruling of the Modern Holdings vs KPA

UGANDA CONSTITUIONAL COURT DELIVERS RULING ON DEATH PENALTY
In a move towards the abolition of the death penalty in Uganda, the Appellate Chamber of the Constitutional Court of Uganda declared as unconstitutional the death sentences of 418 prisoners on death row and further upheld the decision of the Constitutional Court in rendering the automatic nature of the death penalty in Uganda for murder and other offences as "inhuman punishment".

Delivering the ruling on January 21,2009, a coram of six Judges lamented that death penalty did not provide the individuals concerned with an opportunity to mitigate their death sentences. In a majority judgment in the case of the Attorney General of Uganda v. Susan Kigula and 417 others, the Constitutional Court also ruled that any of the prisoners who have been on death row more than 3 years, are now entitled to have their death sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

To access full report, please click on the following: Ruling of the Constitutional Court