Wakilii

Rex v Bamuta (Cr. App. 132-1931.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1931] EACA 19 · 1931 Appeal Dismissed — No Jurisdiction AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from High Court of Uganda's refusal to issue writ of habeas corpus and treatment of matter by way of revision
Decision
Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction

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

The Court of Appeal held it had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the High Court of Uganda's refusal to issue a writ of habeas corpus in a criminal matter. No appeal lies from decisions of the Lukiko Court, from revisional orders of the High Court, or from refusals to grant habeas corpus in criminal causes. The right of appeal in Uganda is governed by statute, and the Criminal Procedure Code provides no right of appeal from such refusals.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Facts

Yusufu Semukasa Bamuta was tried by the Lukiko Court in Uganda under the Adultery and Fornication Law 1917. The judgment was signed by one judge only. The Provincial Commissioner ordered a retrial. Bamuta's brother applied to the High Court for a writ of habeas corpus. The Chief Justice held the proper course was to exercise revisional jurisdiction rather than issue habeas corpus, and on revision ordered a retrial. Bamuta appealed to the Court of Appeal from the Chief Justice's refusal to issue the writ.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the High Court of Uganda's refusal to issue a writ of habeas corpus in a criminal matter.
  2. Whether an appeal lies from a decision of the Lukiko Court.
  3. Whether an appeal lies from a revisional order of the High Court of Uganda.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Court declared it is not empowered to hear the appeal from the Order of the Chief Justice of Uganda made on 28 August 1931.

Rules and key headnotes

Appeals — Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal — Appeals from Native Courts
No appeal lies to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa from a decision of the Lukiko Court of Uganda.
Appeals — Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal — Revisional Orders
No appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from a revisional order of the High Court of Uganda, as the Court's jurisdiction is limited to appeals from findings, sentences or orders recorded or passed by the High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction.
Habeas Corpus — Appeals from Refusal to Grant Writ
No appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from a refusal by the High Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus in a criminal cause or matter, as the right of appeal in Uganda is governed by statute and the Criminal Procedure Code provides no such right of appeal.
Statutory Interpretation — Appellate Jurisdiction
The right of appeal in Uganda does not depend on the English Judicature Act 1873 but on Uganda's own Ordinances, and the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction is limited to that conferred by statute.

Legislation cited (11)

  • Uganda Agreement 1900 Article 6
  • Uganda Agreement (Judicial) 1905
  • Proclamation No. 412 of 1917 (Native Courts in Buganda)
  • Uganda Revised Laws Cap. 4 Courts Ordinance s.61(2)
  • Uganda Criminal Procedure Code 1930 s.332
  • Uganda Criminal Procedure Code 1930 s.339
  • Uganda Criminal Procedure Code 1930 s.340
  • Adultery and Fornication Law 1917 (Buganda Law) s.5
  • Eastern African Court of Appeal Order in Council 1921 s.2
  • Judicature Act 1873 s.19
  • Judicature Act 1873 s.47

Cases cited (6)

  • Rex v Musa Ibrahim (6 E.A.L.R. 117)
  • Ex parte Alice Woodhall (1888) 20 Q.B.D. 832
  • Ex parte Savarkar (1910) 2 K.B. 2056
  • Cox v Hakes (1890) 15 A.C. 506
  • Stanley White v Attorney General (6 E.A.L.R. 3)
  • Eshubaji v Government of Nigeria (1928) 1 W.N.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Bamuta (Cr. App. 132-1931.) [1931] EACA 19 (1 January 1931)
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.