Obbo & Co. Advocates is a premier law firm based in the upscale commercial centre of Kampala Capital City in Uganda – East Africa, well endowed with widely experienced team of legal experts in various fields of law.
We oﬀer a wide range of legal services in:
We oﬀer exceptional Corporate & Commercial Legal Practice. Our corporate and commercial lawyers enjoy vast expertise in handling complex commercial and corporate legal matters oﬀering our clients practical legal solutions in a real and competitive business environment.
To our valued corporate and commercial clients we:
Provide legal advice/opinion in respect to legal and regulatory framework for investing and operating businesses in Uganda and across the East Africa.
Undertake to seek necessary approvals from relevant authorities as by law required to facilitate establishment and operation of your business in Uganda.
Facilitate incorporation and operationalization of any business entity of your choice including but not limited to; Banking and Finance business, Insurance business, Manufacturing companies, Charity Organizations, Intellectual Property protection among others.
Draft and execute all legal documentation in respect to your business entity.
Undertake applicable legal and regulatory compliances for and on behalf of our clients.
Our legal practice in employment sector broadly covers:
Preparation of Work Regulations / HR Manual / Staﬀ Handbook:
Drafting and documentation of terms & conditions of service, social benefits, rules and regulations, staﬀ code of ethics, staﬀ disciplinary processes among others.
Conducting Legal Audit / Due Diligence/ Compliance Review of employment legal
framework to identify and highlight discrepancies in the employer’s records and advise on remedial meas-ures.
Advising the management in handling and negotiating with trade unions/ staﬀ association (if any), highlighting laws applicable and regulatory compliance required.
Advising the management on employer’s liability arising from employees’ accident fatal or otherwise and ensuring compliance with applicable laws.
Advising the management on health and occupational legal safeguards coupled with compliance necessary to minimize unnecessary expenses on staﬀ compensation.
Our ultimate goal in Banking & Finance is to provide strategic and eﬀective expertise advice and legal support to your business on:
Loan Finance and Debt Recovery
Banking and financial regulations
Asset finance and Securitization
Project and Trade finance
Letters of credit
Guarantees and performance bonds
Our Firm provides comprehensive services in all aspects of property and real estate transactions including; Title due diligence,
Sale, purchase and lease transactions
Construction and development
Mortgages and property finance
Advising clients on Real Estate opportunities in Uganda and across East Africa.
Advising our clients on environmental audits, environmental implications on acquisitions and/ or sale of land including regulatory compliances such as obtainingclearances for infrastructure projects.
We oﬀer a full range of legal services for:
Acquisition, Commercialization and Enforcement of intellectual property rights and technology assets in respect to Patents,Trademarks, Designs and Copyrights.
We advise clients on commercial contracts relating to the exploitation of Intellectual Property rights including strategic licensing, joint venture and collaboration documentation, Distribution, agency, supply, sponsorship and other commercial agreements.
Our Tax Practice eﬀectively addresses disputes arising from; Customs & Import duties, Income tax, Value Added Tax, Exercise duties and other aspects like waivers, exemptions, refunds and dumping.
We represent clients at all stages of taxation from assessments, administrative and appellate remedies for resolving tax disputes.
Our tax litigation practice draws eﬀective synergies out of cutting edge combination of court craft of counsel, tax planning and advisory skills of seasoned tax advisors.
Edward .O. Obbo
Oﬃce: +256 414 667 745
Mobile: +256 752 888 884
Mobile: +256 750 984 207
Office: +256 414 667 745
Mobile: +256 779 950 151
Ann Mary Asinde
Mobile: +256 750 547 242
Mary Caroline Amenya
Julian Assange has moved a step closer to a US trial on espionage charges after the UK’s highest court refused to hear his appeal against extradition.
The WikiLeaks founder was attempting to appeal against a judgment by the high court in December that ruled he could be extradited after assurances from the US authorities with regard to his prison conditions there.
The supreme court said on Monday that it had refused permission to appeal “as the application didn’t raise an arguable point of law”. After the decision, the case is expected to be formally sent to Priti Patel to approve the extradition.
Assange’s lawyers will have four weeks to make submissions to the home secretary before her decision. There also remain other routes to fight his extradition, for instance by mounting a challenge on other issues of law raised at first instance that he lost on and have not yet been subject to appeal.
In January last year, district judge Vanessa Baraitser blocked extradition on the basis that procedures in prisons in the US would not prevent Assange from potentially taking his own life.
But that decision was overturned by two senior judges, Lord Burnett of Maldon, the lord chief justice, and Lord Justice Holroyde, at the high court. Burnett said the risk of Assange being held in highly restrictive US prison conditions was “excluded by the assurances which are offered. It follows that we are satisfied that, if the assurances had been before the judge, she would have answered the relevant question differently.”
Responding to the supreme court’s decision, a spokesperson for Assange’s solicitors, Birnberg Peirce, said: “We regret that the opportunity has not been taken to consider the troubling circumstances in which requesting states can provide caveated guarantees after the conclusion of a full evidential hearing. In Mr Assange’s case, the court had found that there was a real risk of prohibited treatment in the event of his onward extradition.”
City firm DLA Piper has stepped in to run an advice service for Ukrainians seeking refuge in the UK that was quickly set up by immigration lawyers following Russia’s invasion.
The website Ukraine Advice Project UK has registered over 430 volunteer lawyers and given pro bono advice in nearly 700 requests since it was set up on 28 February by lawyers Jennifer Blair, Miranda Butler, Simon Cox, Alex Piletska and John Vassiliou, supported by CJ McKinney of Free Movement.
The organisation announced last Friday that the project had grown to an ‘unmanageable’ scale for the six friends, who set up the project in their spare time. ‘We are therefore delighted to confirm that DLA Piper has agreed to provide us with desperately needed help administering volunteers and requests for advice,’ the organisation said.
‘DLA Piper’s pro bono team will draw on their experience running a similar initiative for Afghan refugees to triage and manage requests for advice and offers of assistance from volunteer lawyers.’
The website states that no information or personal data will be shared or made available to anyone in or associated with DLA Piper’s Moscow office.
Meanwhile, Hogan Lovells has told the Gazette that it has set up a joint pro bono scheme with other law firms to allow volunteer lawyers to provide basic legal information to individuals about the UK Ukrainian refugee scheme.
Aswift ad hoc tribunal should be set up to put Vladimir Putin on trial for war crimes committed during the invasion of Ukraine, lawyers have argued.
More than 30 leading lawyers and academics from Goldsmiths University of London and other institutions have signed an open letter, seen by the Gazette, calling for urgent action to bring Putin, and those around him, to justice.
They suggest an ad hoc justice mechanism similar to those set up by the United Nations for Yugoslavia and Rwanda to prosecute those responsible for genocide, war crimes, and other atrocities and serious humanitarian violations in those conflicts.
Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, who prosecuted the former president of Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosovic, for war crimes before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the former Conservative attorney general, Dominic Grieve QC, have signed the letter.
Other signatories include the barristers Jessica Simor QC, Maya Sikand QC, Leslie Thomas QC and Adam Wagner, and Professor Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos, head of the law department at Goldsmiths. They call on the UK, USA and France to put political pressure on Russia to accept the authority of the International Court of Justice (IJC) and the International Criminal Court ICC).
If Russia refuses, they said, ‘the international legal order should press for an immediate and swift ad hoc justice mechanism to bring Putin, and those around him, to justice’.
They said: ‘Public realisation of the unfolding tragedy in Ukraine presents a unique opportunity to renew our commitment to international law and international human rights.’
But warned that public support may ebb once the war is over, and urged the international community to act quickly.
‘While the window is still open politicians around the globe must use public empathy with Ukraine’s plight as a driver to move the international society forward, and the Russian war machine backwards, and to ensure “never again” is not empty words,’ they wrote.
The International Criminal Court this week began an investigation into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine after 39 countries – including the UK – backed the move.
Little over half of judicial review rulings handed down by the courts make it on to the main free database of court judgments, according to new research. A study by experts from the University of York, working with London firm Mishcon de Reya, found that, between 2015 and 2020 only 55% of 5,408 administrative court judgments identified by a commercial subscription service appeared on the website of the British and Irish Legal Information Institute (BAILII).
The authors say access to public law judgments ‘matters a great deal’. Access to judgments can shape legal advice and also influence public policy.
The biggest gap in publication appears to be with judgments given ex tempore rather than handed down as Word documents, the team concludes. While a stenographer is sometimes brought in to court to transcribe these judgments in real time, there is currently no infrastructure in place to enable HM Courts & Tribunals Service to acquire such transcriptions.
The study found that only 55% of judicial review judgments are posted on the free BAILII website
‘It is important to caution against any suggestion that ex tempore judgments are somehow inherently less important or otherwise matter less,’ the authors comment in the journal of the UK Constitutional Law Association. ‘While some judgments may be recognised immediately as important, it is, particularly given the multi-layered value of judgments, not always apparent which judgments may be deemed valuable at some future point.’ For example, they point out, a string of seemingly simple decisions may be used to build important arguments and judgments decades later. ‘Similarly, it is impossible to tell which judgments may be important for future research—cases that may seem routine may make up an important dataset in the future.’
They conclude that public lawyers, whether in research or practice, should pay close attention to this issue, particularly as the government is reshaping how judgments are managed and made available through its initiative to make judgments available via a National Archives website due to go live next month. ‘The gap in the availability of judgments we have examined in this post shows that an important part of public law is not meaningfully public, and ongoing changes ought to be seen as an opportunity to progress from that unsatisfactory position rather than entrench it.
© 2022 Obbo & Co. Advocates, All rights reserved. Developed by Pahappa