Greenwatch has been involved in the following court cases. To view these articles , you will need the Free Adobe Acrobat Reader software to view these documents.

235KB ACODE Vs. Attorney General (Misc. No. 0100 of 2004)

Defacto degazetting of Butamira Forest reserve.

189KB Greenwatch Vs. Attorney General & Uganda Wildlife Authority (Misc. No. 92 of 2004)

Export Chimpanzees, from Uganda to China or elsewhere.

149KB Greenwatch Vs. Attorney General & NEMA (Misc. No. 140 of 2002)

This case was brought by Greenwatch seeking regulation of the manufacture, use, distribution and sale of plastic bags and restoration order. Greenwatch observes that plastic bags are a menace and hazard to the environment.

129KB Jane Lugolobi & 9 Others Vs. Gerald Ssegirinya & Smat Curry Powder Factory (Misc. App. 371 of 2002)

This case sought a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from manufacturing and processing of curry powder at the respondent’s factory in a residential area.

155KB B.A.T Vs TEAN (Civil App. No. 27/2003)

This was a case on the duty of manufacturers of dangerous products to adequately warn consumers of the extent of risks associated with their product, particularly cigarettes.

163KB GREENWATCH (U) LTD. –vs- A.G & UGANDA ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD. (HCCT-00-CV-MC-0139 OF 2001)

Greenwatch, the applicant in this suit, sought to obtain a copy of the Power Purchase Agreement from the government of Uganda in vain. The government stated that the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is a comprehensive document with a lot of information including the sponsor’s technical and commercial secrets and therefore contains clauses on confidentiality and protection of intellectual property, which do not permit them to make it available to the entire public. The applicant then commenced legal action against the Attorney General and Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited(UETCL).

It was held that since the Minister of Energy signed the Implementation Agreement in her official capacity on behalf of the government of the Republic of Uganda, then the Power Purchase Agreement is a public document .

135KB SIRAGI WAISWA VERSUS KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS LTD HC (MISC. APPLIC. NO. 230 OF 2001)

This was an application for a temporary injunction restraining the respondent factory from acquiring Butamira Forest reserve for Sugar cane plantation and to restrain the factory’s agents from evicting or destroying property belonging to the peasant farmers residing therein. A six months temporary injunction was granted by court.

158KB TEAN VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND NEMA HC (MISC.APPLIC.NO.39 OF 2001)

This was an application on behalf of non-smoking members of the public to protect their constitutional rights to a clean and healthy environment and right to life. The applicant claimed that non-smokers are exposed to second hand tobacco smoke and hence infringed their right to health and life.

160KB GREENWATCH & ACODE VERSUS GOLF COURSE HOLDINGS LTD HC (MISC APPLIC. NO OF 2001)

This application sought a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from developing and constructing a Hotel in a wetland and green areas hence threating the environment. The application failed.

177KB BYABAZAIRE GRACE VERSUS MUKWANO INDUSTRIES (MISC. APPLIC.NO. 909 OF 2000)

This was an action against the defendant factory, which was located adjacent to residential homes and emitting obnoxious and poisonous smoke, which was repelling and hazardous to the community.

167KB NAPE VERSUS AES NILE POWER (MISC CAUSE NO. 268 OF 1999)

This application sought a temporary injunction to stop the respondent company from concluding a power purchase agreement with the government of Uganda until NEMA concluded an EIA process on the project.