Nampogo & Anor v Attorney General (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE No. 246 OF 2016)
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 once a Mandamus order has been issued compelling payment, the matter becomes res judicata and a fresh application for Mandamus based on the same facts and claim cannot legally arise. An existing certificate of order that has not been varied or set aside requires enforcement, not a new Mandamus application. Application dismissed.
Outcome
Application dismissed as res judicata
Facts
The applicants brought a fresh application for Mandamus in 2016. The application arose from an earlier Mandamus order in Miscellaneous Cause No. 48 of 2009, which had compelled the respondent to pay the applicants a decretal sum with interest at 6% per annum from 13 October 2004. A certificate of order against the Secretary to Treasury dated 11 May 2010 had been issued pursuant to that earlier order. That certificate had never been varied or set aside. The applicants sought a second Mandamus order based on the same facts and claim.
Issues
- Whether a fresh application for Mandamus can be brought based on the same facts and claim after an earlier Mandamus order has been issued.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.