Okia Joseph

Kenya High Court found that the ex parte applicant’s admitted use of unknown tools or artificial intelligence to draft his pleadings amounted to an abuse of the court, and barred him from filing any other pleadings in any court that are machine generated unless there is a law in Kenya allowing or providing for drafting using artificial intelligence tools. In Republic of Kenya, High Court at Nairobi County, Milimani High Court, HCJRMISC/E120/2025 (ruling delivered 16 April 2026), the Court considered whether it is legal to draft pleadings using artificial intelligence tools. The respondent/ex parte applicant admitted that he had used what he described as ordinary digital tools, including legal research tools, to assist in writing, but maintained that he had personally reviewed, edited and adopted every document and remained personally responsible for all factual statements on oath and legal citations. He argued that his pleadings contained no fabricated cases, false citations or invented quotations, and that, being self-represented, he had used lawful tools to participate effectively in court. In determining the issue, the Court noted that the use of personalised drafting tools, structures and methodologies not provided for under the rules of drafting, such as those the applicant had admittedly used, was deplorable. It further noted that allowing a departure from the rules of drafting would create a litigation disaster, leaving judges with no guiding beacons to propel proceedings, and that this would ultimately be reflected in judgments informed by such an unregulated terrain. The Court stated that the generation of pleadings through unknown tools or artificial intelligence gives an unfair advantage to the person using such tools, and that this amounts to an affront to access to justice as guaranteed under Article 48 of the Constitution. It further stated that drafting pleadings using artificial tools unknown to the Civil Procedure Rules, and artificial intelligence not provided for in Kenyan law, gives such a user or litigant an unfair advantage over his or her rival in an adversarial system. The Court also noted that the Rules Committee had not yet amended or introduced drafting tools or mechanisms assisted by electronic tools, technology or artificial intelligence. It further stated that the fact that the ex parte applicant admitted to having used unknown tools or artificial intelligence to draft his pleadings amounted to an abuse of the court. In that regard, the Court clarified that it was not for him, as a litigant, to vouch for or verify for the court the truthfulness or accuracy of such undisclosed tools or AI-generated pleadings, since to allow that would mean that he would act as a judge in his own case, which was unacceptable and a violation of the rules of natural justice. On that basis, the Court barred the applicant from filing any other pleadings in any court which are machine generated, unless there is a law in Kenya allowing or providing for drafting using artificial intelligence tools. The Court nevertheless observed that technology is a powerful socio-economic growth tool when harnessed within a legal framework, and noted that Kenya is currently working towards legally embracing artificial intelligence. It stated that, once the legislators come up with an appropriate legislative framework, artificial intelligence will then form part of Kenyan law. The Court therefore invited the Rules Committee to consider amending the Civil Procedure Rules, through public participation, so as to embrace technology and artificial intelligence drafting rules.

𝐔𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚 𝐀𝐌𝐋 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐀𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐭 The High Court has clarified procedural limits to the Financial Intelligence Authority’s account-freezing powers under the Anti Money Laundering Act. Freezes must be based on reasonable, demonstrable objective material and promptly followed by court proceedings for judicial sanction. Our Partner Isaac Walukagga and Associate, Hussein D. Gulam successfully acted for the Applicant. Read our full analysis here: mmaks.co.ug/articles/2026/…

Don't just raise a PO because an Arbitration Clause exists, prove it, show the dispute is worthy of resolution. Where a debt appears undisputed, the court will not refer the matter to arbitration, since arbitration is only for actual disputes, not clear uncontested claims.

CAN SHAREHOLDER RESOLUTIONS EXECUTED ELECTRONICALLY BE VALID WITHOUT EXPLICIT CONSENT FROM THE PARTIES? In Feldman v. Dexibit Limited, the court held that electronically executed shareholder resolutions were invalid because the parties had not agreed to use e-signatures. Without mutual consent to adopt electronic execution, the resolutions did not satisfy legal formalities. Practice Tips: • Obtain explicit consent from all parties before using electronic signatures for resolutions. • Include e-signature provisions in the company’s constitution or shareholder agreements. • Confirm acceptance in writing (e.g., email or platform acknowledgment) before executing critical corporate documents. • Document procedures to avoid disputes over authority or validity of electronically signed resolutions. Visit & Subscribe: pmlawhub.com

Where an applicant fails to establish a prima facie case for stay, the balance of convenience will ordinarily tip in favour of the successful party to enjoy the fruits of their judgment. High Court Rules The Court clarified that the “nugatory” consideration, namely, whether refusal to stay execution would render the pending application pointless, must always be assessed alongside the likelihood of success. Even a potentially irreversible execution will not justify a stay where the pending application lacks reasonable prospects of success. Read more lawpointuganda.com/post/where-an-…

Join PM Digital Law Hub on 29 May 2026 at 2:00PM for its Online Zoom Symposium and the launch of a stakeholder report on ECCMIS, assessing the Uganda Judiciary’s readiness for a fully paperless system by 1 July 2026. The attached concept note outlines the background and context, rationale for the study, objectives, scope and methodology, key areas of inquiry, expected outputs, and the broader case for an inclusive, effective, and sustainable digital justice transition. Read the full concept note here: drive.google.com/file/d/1EuqLvC…

THE Constitutional Court has dismissed retired Justice Tšeliso Monapathi’s bid to access his pension benefits, ordering him instead to complete 128 long-outstanding judgments – some dating back decades – and condemning his conduct as a serious dereliction of constitutional duty. In its ruling delivered this week, the three-member constitutional bench found that Justice Monapathi had failed to discharge his constitutional responsibilities and must finalise all pending cases, including 11 part-heard matters, despite having retired in August 2024 after reaching the mandatory retirement age of 75. lestimes.com/?p=90152

DECEPTIVE PROPOSED AGE LIMIT ON USED MOTOR VEHICLES FY 2026/27 There is proposal in @Parliament_Ug to slash the age limit on imported used cars from 15 years to 13 years. And, as usual, they’re waving the “emissions” flag because they know it’s an easy sell to the public. But once you dig into the details, the whole thing starts to smell like something else entirely (REVENUE). Let’s stop pretending this is about the environment. Where the deception starts: ⏩Japan doesn’t impose age limits on cars for its own citizens. They don’t tell buyers, “By the way, this car expires in 13 years.” So why do we pretend that this is the global standard of managing emissions? ⏩Where is the evidence? When the age limit was cut to 15 years in 2018, did emissions drop? Did air quality improve? Did anyone even measure? Or are we just recycling the same unproven idea every few years? ⏩“Environmental Levy” is a convenient cash cow. Government collects it, but NEMA @nemaug, the agency responsible for the environment, doesn’t see a shilling (apart from the formal allocation per FY). ⏩If emissions were truly the concern, we would test vehicles before importation. The levy would depend on the result. The equipment is cheap, portable, and widely used elsewhere. But testing doesn’t generate the same easy target revenue as blanket levies. ⏩The levy should be tied to actual emission levels, publicly standardised UNBS @UNBSug . But transparency is the last thing anyone seems interested in. The myth of the “clean” brand-new car There’s this lazy assumption that brand-new cars are automatically clean, safe, and compliant. Except reality disagrees and I agree with reality: ⏩ Some “brand-new” imports from China, South Korea, Malaysia, etc., arrive with defects because Uganda doesn’t enforce standards on them. We do not have a standard for motor vehicles manufactured here or abroad. We go by what we get. China supplied Uganda road construction equipment and it did not even last two years. ⏩Government (the biggest buyer of new vehicles) imports cars with Euro 4 engines. ⏩Euro 4 was Europe’s standard in the year 2000. Europe is now on Euro 6. So while government lectures citizens about “old cars,” it’s buying vehicles with 26-year-old engine technology. ⏩ Industry experts point to the real culprit: **high sulphur fuel**. High sulphur = more sulphur dioxide = PM2.5 pollution + acid rain. But instead of fixing fuel quality, we blame the age of cars. ⏩ UNBS assumes new cars don’t need PiVOC. Yet I’ve been in “brand-new” cars in Brazil and South Africa that came with missing seatbelts. So what exactly are we trusting here? So what’s the logic? Because right now, it looks less like environmental policy and more like a revenue scheme dressed up as climate / emission concerns. If the goal were genuinely clean air, we’d fix fuel quality, enforce standards on all vehicles, and test emissions scientifically instead of punishing people for buying affordable cars.

Hon. Justice Peter Kinobe played an instrumental role in guiding moot students during their submissions at the Labour Law Moot Competition. With patience and keen attention to detail, he listened to each argument, offering timely interventions that sharpened the students’ legal reasoning and advocacy skills.

Key Note Address from Hon. Justice Mike Chibita , the Chief Guest , Supreme Court and Patron of UCLF . #LabourLawMootCompetition2026

Labour law involves complex workplace issues like unfair dismissal, discrimination, collective bargaining and workers’ rights. A moot competition forces students to apply legal theory to realistic disputes, simulating court or tribunal proceedings.

MINISTER MURULI MUKASA LAUNCHES DECLARATION OF INCOME, ASSETS AND LIABILITIES FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS The Minister for Public Service, Hon. Muruli Mukasa on 1st April, 2026, launched the declaration of income, assets and liabilities for Public Officers, and the User Guide to the Leadership Code Act, Cap. 33. The User Guide aims to make the Leadership Code Act more user friendly in terms of giving clarity on the obligations of both Leaders and public. The one-month declaraton exercise for Public Officers which will end on 30th April, 2026, is a deliberate step towards reinforcing integrity, a reminder that public officers ought to be accountable because they hold offices on behalf of the public. During the launch, the Minister reminded the Public Officers that declaration is a legal requirement and not an administrative burden like it had been misconstrued. “When you declare your income, assets and liabilities you demonstrate honesty and accountability. It shows that you are a person of integrity and can confidently account for what you have without fear,” he said. He assured @IGGUganda of the government’s full support in the enforcement of the Leadership Code Act across the public sector, a revelation that emboldens the @IGGUganda commitment to ensure a transparent and accountable public service which prioritises public interest in service delivery. The Leadership Code Act requires specified public officers to declare their incomes, assets and liabilities to the Inspector General of Government every five years. Public Officers are persons working in a Ministry, Department, Agency (MDA) or Local Government (LG) whose salary is paid by the Government of Uganda. Through the enforcement of the Leadership Code Act, the @IGGUganda is nurturing a culture where accountability is not optional but expected. The Minister for Ethics and Integrity, Hon. Rose Lily Akello, commended the IG for its commitment to ensure that ethical standards among Public Officers are upheld through declaration. “This is a very important period and all Public Officers should take this exercise seriously. We want Public Officers to be accountable and that’s why we want them to declare. Those who fail to declare will be prosecuted by the Leadership Code Tribunal because the law is very clear. I encourage all Public Officers to comply,” she said. The Inspector General of Government (IGG) Lady Justice Naluzze Aisha Batala, said that the declaration exercise is not merely a statutory requirement but a cornerstone of good governance. The declaration, Lady Justice Naluzze emphasised, serves as a constant reminder that transparency and accountability are not optional virtues in public service, but fundamental obligations which, when upheld, become the driving force behind efficient, timely and citizen-centered service delivery. “Today’s launch reaffirms the unwavering commitment of the @IGGUganda to enforce ethical standards across the public service. Public office is a trust, and those entrusted with it must never prioritise personal interests at the expense of the citizens they serve,” she said. The IGG added, “When Public Officers are aware that their financial status is subject to scrutiny, they are more likely to act with integrity, make decisions in the public interest and avoid practices such as bribery and undue delays that undermine service delivery.” She allayed fears of the Public Officers on the declaration process, saying that the @IGGUganda has taken deliberate steps to make sure that the process is efficient and accessible. The Chairperson of @LeadershipCodeT @rosekarugonjo said that simplifying the Leadership Code of Conduct is understood and upheld across all levels of Public Service. "We hope that the user Guide will bring about a renewed commitment to implement the Leadership Code Act, enhance access to Justice and equality and restore legitimacy and trust in our institutions," Dr. Karugonjo said.

In a paper gaining wide attention, Professor Justin Driver contends that the legal reasoning in Supreme Court opinions matters less than what the court decides. He explains why in this Q&A. law.yale.edu/yls-today/news…

AI regulations were a crucial part of the new copyright amendment bill to ensure creators' rights are protected in the digital age.Regulations and guidelines on AI & copyright could balance innovation with creator rights. @pmpaulmukiibi had brilliant views in his recommendations.

“Confidence comes from preparation.” — Kobe Bryant

Success in advocacy isn’t an accident; it’s a deliberate craft. Join us for an exclusive session on mastering the mooting journey—from researcher to coach to seasoned litigator. Learn how to build a legal career that commands respect. 🔗 Secure your spot: forms.gle/MgFAMfuyRZreeY…

I’ve listened to this more than 42 times. Oh boy what a message!!!!🔥🔥

🚨 New Law Alert Legal Notice No. 1 of 2026 — The Constitution (Operation of Mobile Courts) (Practice) Directions, 2026 (Uganda Gazette, 19 March 2026) brings courts closer to communities and enhances speedy justice delivery 👉:@2026-03-19" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">ulii.org/en/akn/ug/act/…

In US v. Heppner, the court held that feeding client info into a public AI chatbot breaches the attorney‑client privilege because using AI without locked‑down, enterprise‑grade safeguards, and not being innovative, is handing clients’ secrets to the internet.