Abwon Oketcho Columbanus and 3 Others v Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited and 3 Others (CIVIL SUIT NO. 39 OF 2022 (arising from Civil Su
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
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
Held that the High Court has jurisdiction to determine whether a party is in contempt of its own order, regardless of the subject matter of the underlying suit. However, the contempt application failed because the interim order relied upon had been vacated by consent order in September 2018, and thus no lawful order existed at the time of the alleged contempt in February 2024.
Outcome
Application dismissed for failure to prove existence of a lawful order at the time of alleged contempt
Facts
The applicants (representing 614 others) brought a contempt application alleging that the respondents defied an interim court order issued on 22nd September 2016. The alleged contempt was said to have commenced in February 2024. The 1st and 4th respondents filed a preliminary objection claiming the High Court lacked jurisdiction because the dispute related to the electricity sector and should be heard by the Electricity Disputes Tribunal. The respondents also contended that the interim order had been vacated by a consent order entered on 27th September 2018, which allowed for revaluation, resurvey, and rehabilitation works on damaged pylons.
Issues
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a contempt of court application arising from a dispute involving the electricity sector.
- Whether the applicants proved the existence of a lawful order at the time of the alleged contempt.
Orders
- Preliminary objection overruled.
- Application dismissed.
- Costs to be in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Electricity Act Cap.145 s.109(1)
- Electricity Act Cap.145 s.67
- Electricity Act Cap.145 s.70
- Electricity Act Cap.145 s.93
Cases cited (4)
- Housing Finance Bank Ltd and Another v Edward Musisi (Court of Appeal Miscellaneous Application No. 158 of 2010)
- Hadkinson vs Hadkinson (1952) ALL ER 567
- Nambi v Lwanga (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 213 of 2017)
- Ssempebwa and Others v Attorney General (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 05 of 2019)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.