Kawooya v Bangu and Another (Civil Application 4 of 2007)

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.

Holding

On an application under Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules to extend time for filing a notice of appeal in a Local Council V chairperson election matter, the Court held that appellate jurisdiction is a creature of statute and cannot be inferred or implied. Section 145(3) of the Local Governments Act makes the Court of Appeal's decision in such election appeals final, and neither section 172 of that Act nor section 66 of the Parliamentary Elections Act nor section 6 of the Judicature Act confers a right of appeal to the Supreme Court. As there was no right of appeal, it was futile to consider sufficient cause for extension of time. The application was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Application for extension of time dismissed with costs; no right of appeal to the Supreme Court exists in LC.V election matters

Facts

The applicant was elected LC.V Chairman of Kamuli District at the 2006 general election. The first respondent successfully challenged the result in the High Court at Jinja, which nullified the election on the ground that the applicant lacked the requisite academic qualifications. The applicant's appeal to the Court of Appeal (Election Appeal No. 5 of 2006) was dismissed. His advocates then filed an application in the Court of Appeal for review and correction of the judgment under the slip rule, which was dismissed on 15 March 2007. After changing advocates, the applicant was advised that the earlier lawyers had used the wrong procedure and that the correct course was an appeal to the Supreme Court, but the time for filing a notice of appeal had by then expired. The applicant accordingly applied for an extension of time, attributing the delay to the mistake of his former counsel.

Issues

1. Whether there is a right of appeal to the Supreme Court against a decision concerning the election of a District (LC.V) Chairperson.
2. Whether the applicant showed sufficient reason, namely the mistake of his counsel, to warrant an extension of time to file a notice of appeal.

Orders

• Application dismissed with costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (16)

• Supreme Court Rules r.5
• Local Governments Act s.138(1)
• Local Governments Act s.138(2)
• Local Governments Act s.145(1)
• Local Governments Act s.145(2)
• Local Governments Act s.145(3)
• Local Governments Act s.160
• Local Governments Act s.172
• Parliamentary Elections Act s.66(2)
• Parliamentary Elections Act s.66(3)
• Parliamentary Elections Act s.67(3)
• Judicature Act s.4
• Judicature Act s.6(1)
• Constitution of Uganda art.86
• Constitution of Uganda art.132
• Constitution of Uganda art.140

Cases cited (8)

• Joseph Muluta v Sylvano Katama (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1999)
• Mansilkhal Ramji Karia v Attorney General and 2 Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2003)
• Attorney General v Shah [1971] EA 50
• Matendegyere and Others v Kasikura and Others (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 8 of 1991)
• Sanga v Baya [1973] EA 312
• Bhaichand Bhagwanji Shah v Jamnadas & Co. Ltd [1959] EA 838
• Florence Nabatanzi v Naome Busobedde (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1987)
• Baku Raphael Obudra and Obiga Kania v Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2005)

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