Court of Appeal dismisses Nakasero redevelopment case

The Court of Appeal has dismissed a case in which Nakasero Market Sitting Tenants (NAMASITE) was challenging the dismissal of its case against the award of a sub-lease for the redevelopment of the Market.

In a unanimous judgement, three justices of the Appeal Court; Fredrick Egonda-Ntende, Stephen Musota and Remmy Kasule disallowed the appeal in which NAMASITE was challenging the dismissal of its case.

A group of traders under their NAMASITE had faulted the High Court for failing to appreciate the law and facts of the case before dismissing its case on reasoning lack of sufficient evidence.

Court documents indicate that in 2015, NAMASITE sued Nakasero Market Sitting Vendors and Traders Limited and Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) seeking for declarations that the city authorities had fraudulently and illegally awarded a sublease to Nakasero Market Sitting Vendors and Traders Limited to redevelop Nakasero Market in Kampala.

But the judges ruled that the appeal did not have merit and ordered NAMASITE to pay legal costs incurred by their counterparts, Nakasero Market Sitting Vendors and Traders Limited.

The court of appeal decision resulted from an appeal in which NAMASITE had sought to challenge High Court decisions that dismissed its case and applications reasoning that they did not disclose a cause of action.

Through their lawyers, NAMASITE had also sought for an order to set aside the award of the sublease to Nakasero Market Sitting Vendors and Traders Limited, an order for the grant of the sublease to it or an order to form a new joint venture company incorporating the two worrying market traders.

The complaining group of traders had also filed an application for a temporary order stopping the accused parties from executing or implementing the terms of the sublease and to maintain the status quo of the market status.

According to the court decision, by going to court NAMASITE seemed to derive its right from a government policy backed by a presidential directive yet government policies are merely guidelines or executive instructions whose compliance thereof cannot be enforced through courts and neither can a party derive a legal right from such policies.

“I would hold that neither government policy nor a presidential directive, not anchored in legislation, have any legal force to confer a right on, or interest, to the appellant (NAMASITE). The appellant ought to show that it has a legal interest in the subject matter which was violated by the defendants and as a result of which it is entitled to a remedy for it to establish a cause of action,” Justice Egonda-Ntende ruled, adding that NAMASITE had not established a cause of action in its case.

In 2007, upon feeling unfairly treated by then KCC, the disgruntled traders petitioned President Museveni who directed KCC to implement the government policy to the effect that Nakasero market be managed and developed by the genuine sitting tenants, traders and vendors in line with the government policy and relevant laws.

The meeting with the president, according to the court documents, followed KCC turning away the traders’ request, without legal justification, to be considered for the offer of the sub lease to redevelop their market.