Wakilii

Epetait v Ismat (Election Petition Appeal No. 12 11)

Court of Appeal · [2012] UGCA 34 · 2012 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Request to correct an omission in an election petition appeal judgment under the slip rule
Decision
Judgment amended to include a certificate for two counsel

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

Acting under Rule 36 of the Court of Appeal Rules, which permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes arising from accidental slip or omission, the court found that it had omitted to award a certificate for two counsel that had been prayed for during submissions. Since the appellant was represented by two counsel and the respondent had not objected to the request, the court granted the request and amended its judgment accordingly to give effect to the court's intention at the time judgment was given.

Outcome

Judgment amended to include a certificate for two counsel

Facts

The appellant, Epetait Francis, had appealed against a High Court judgment in an election petition. The appellant was represented by two counsel. During submissions, a certificate for two counsel had been prayed for, but the Court of Appeal's judgment omitted to address this request. On 9 August 2012, the Registrar received a letter from M/S Sam Njuba, counsel for the appellant, drawing attention to this omission. The letter was copied to counsel for the respondent, who raised no objection. The court considered the request under Rule 36 of its rules.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should amend its judgment to award a certificate for two counsel under the slip rule where it had omitted to do so.

Orders

  • The request for a certificate for two counsel is granted.
  • The judgment is amended accordingly.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Slip Rule — Correction of Accidental Omission in Judgment
Under Rule 36 of the Court of Appeal Rules, the court may correct any clerical or arithmetical mistake in a judgment arising from an accidental slip or omission, the purpose being to give effect to the intention of the court when judgment was given.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Certificate for Two Counsel
Where a party represented by two counsel prayed for a certificate for two counsel during submissions and the court inadvertently omitted to award it, the court may amend the judgment to grant the certificate, particularly where the opposing party raises no objection.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Epetait v Ismat (Election Petition Appeal No. 12 11) [2012] UGCA 34 (13 December 2012)
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.