Hon. Anifa Bangirana Kawooya v Attorney General and National Council for Higher Education (Miscellaneous Application No. 46 of 2010)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

The Constitutional Court held it had jurisdiction under Article 137(3) to entertain the petition given the applicant's allegations against the NCHE. However, the single judge declined to grant the interim injunction because the applicant had not come to court with clean hands: she had accepted nomination as the NRM flag bearer in disobedience of a subsisting High Court interim order restraining the primaries. As an injunction is an equitable remedy, a party whose conduct is improper is denied relief. The court found it unnecessary to consider the remaining conditions for an interim injunction and dismissed the application with costs to the respondents.

Outcome

Application for interim injunction dismissed with costs; petition to proceed to hearing

Facts

The applicant, a candidate for the Sembabule District Woman Member of Parliament seat, held a Certificate of Equivalence issued by the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE) on 8 December 2005. By a letter dated 25 August 2010, the NCHE recalled the certificate for further investigations. The applicant filed a constitutional petition under Article 137(3) alleging the recall contravened her rights to fair hearing and fair administrative treatment under Articles 28(1), 42 and 44. Alongside the petition she sought an interim injunction restraining the NCHE from enforcing the directive pending determination of the petition. The respondents opposed the application and adduced evidence that a High Court interim order (in Egwoli Rashid v NRM, Misc. Cause No. 403/2010) had restrained the NRM from conducting Sembabule primaries in which the applicant was a candidate, yet the applicant nonetheless offered herself and was nominated as the NRM flag bearer in disobedience of that order.

Issues

1. Whether the Constitutional Court had jurisdiction to entertain the petition and application.
2. Whether the applicant was entitled to an interim injunction restraining enforcement of the NCHE directive pending determination of the petition.
3. Whether the applicant came to court with clean hands so as to merit an equitable remedy.

Orders

• Application dismissed.
• Costs of the application to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Constitution of Uganda Article 137(3)
• Constitution of Uganda Article 137(4)
• Constitution of Uganda Article 28(1)
• Constitution of Uganda Article 42
• Constitution of Uganda Article 44
• Constitutional Court (Petitions and References) Rules S.I No. 91 of 2005 r.3

Cases cited (5)

• Jim Muhwezi v Attorney General and IGG (Miscellaneous Application No. 18 of 2007)
• Giella v Cassman Brown and Company Ltd [1973] EA 358
• Moody v Cox & Another [1916-17] All ER Rep 548
• Goodman Agencies v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 3 of 2008)
• Egwoli Rashid v NRM (Miscellaneous Cause No. 403 of 2010)

Cases citing this judgment (3)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Fred Mushabe and Others v Kajumba Proscovia (HCT-01-LD-MA-0016-2026)
• Nkwanzi Kalebu v Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd & 2 Ors (Civil Appeal No. 360 of 2017)
• Nkwanzi v Stanbic Bank (U) Limited and Others (Civil Application No. 360 of 2017)

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