Byaruhanga Katumba v Kiwalabye Musoke (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1998)

Court of Appeal · [1998] UGCA 56 · 1998 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

Appeal from High Court decision allowing an election petition and cancelling the appellant's election

Decision

Appeal dismissed; High Court order cancelling the appellant's election and ordering fresh elections upheld

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court of Appeal held that the word 'shall' in Section 143(2) of the Local Government Act 1997, requiring election petitions to be heard and determined within three months, is directory rather than mandatory. The provision was intended only to ensure expeditious determination of election petitions and did not oust the court's jurisdiction after the prescribed period. For a statute to oust the court's jurisdiction it must do so expressly or by clear words. Accordingly, a judgment delivered after the three-month period was not null and void, and the court retained inherent power to extend time to meet the ends of justice. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Facts

The appellant was elected Chairperson of the L.C. V of Kiboga District in the April 1998 elections. The respondent, an unsuccessful candidate, filed an election petition in the High Court under Section 139 of the Local Government Act 1997 challenging the appellant's election on the ground that he was not academically qualified. The High Court (Arach-Amoko J.) upheld the petition, cancelled the results of the appellant's election, ordered fresh elections, and awarded costs to the respondent. The judgment was delivered on 27 August 1998, after the expiration of the three-month statutory period prescribed by Section 143(2) of the Act. The appellant appealed, arguing that the judgment was null and void because it was delivered outside the mandatory statutory period.

Issues

Whether Section 143(2) of the Local Government Act No. 1 of 1997 is mandatory and therefore ousts the jurisdiction of the court over an election petition after the expiration of the prescribed three-month period.
Whether a judgment delivered after the statutory period prescribed by Section 143(2) is null and void.

Orders

Ground 1 of the appeal struck out for contravening rule 85 of the Rules of the Court of Appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
Costs awarded to the respondent here and in the court below.

Key headnotes

Statutory Interpretation — Mandatory and Directory Provisions — Meaning of 'shall'

The mere use of the word 'shall' in a statute is not necessarily mandatory; whether a provision is mandatory or directory depends on the legislature's intention, ascertained from the whole scope and purpose of the enactment and the importance of the provision relative to the object the Act seeks to secure.

Statutory Interpretation — Ouster of Jurisdiction — Requirement of Express or Clear Words

For a statute to oust the jurisdiction of the court over a matter, it must state so expressly or by clear words; jurisdiction is not ousted merely by the use of the word 'shall' or by silence as to the consequences of non-compliance.

Electoral Law — Election Petitions — Time Limit for Determination under Section 143(2) of the Local Government Act

Section 143(2) of the Local Government Act 1997, requiring election petitions to be heard and determined within three months, is directory and not mandatory; it is intended to ensure expeditious determination and does not oust the court's jurisdiction after the expiration of the prescribed period.

Electoral Law — Validity of Judgment Delivered Outside Statutory Period

A judgment in an election petition delivered after the three-month period prescribed by Section 143(2) of the Local Government Act 1997 is not null and void, since the provision is directory and the court retains inherent power to extend time to meet the ends of justice.

Legislation cited (7)

Local Government Act 1997 s.143(2)
Local Government Act 1997 s.139
Local Government Act 1997 s.173
Parliamentary Elections (Interim Provisions) Statute No. 4 of 1996
Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules 1996 rule 19
Cooperative Societies Act 1970 s.73
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1991 s.16(1)

Cases cited (5)

Mukula International Ltd v Cardinal Nsubuga and Another (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
David B. Kayondo v The Cooperative Bank Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1991)
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Langridge [1991] 3 All ER 591
Jaffer Brothers Ltd v Mohamed Magid Bagalaliwo and 2 Others (Civil Appeal No. 43 of 1997)
Pritam Kaur v S Russell and Sons Ltd [1973] 1 All ER 617

Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.