Walube Kyalya Maureen Faith v Electoral Commission and Nabirye Agnes (Miscellaneous Application No. 156 of 2015)
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 set aside a consent order that had purported to dispose of an election petition appeal. While the applicant failed to prove that her signature was forged (a higher-than-balance-of-probabilities standard not met), the order was nonetheless a nullity. The Assistant/Deputy Registrar lacked jurisdiction to determine the appeal, which under Article 135(1) of the Constitution requires an uneven bench of not less than three justices. Further, parties cannot by consent reverse the judgment of a lower court; only an appellate court can do so after hearing the appeal, and issues of law cannot be subject to consent. The application was allowed with no order as to costs.
Outcome
Consent order of 21 August 2012 set aside; no declaratory order made regarding the parliamentary seat as that issue was moot
Facts
The applicant contested the 2011 parliamentary elections for Jinja District Woman Member of Parliament and lost to the 2nd respondent. She successfully petitioned the High Court (Election Petition No. 16 of 2011), which annulled the election and ordered fresh elections. The respondents appealed to the Court of Appeal (Election Petition Appeal No. 05 of 2012). Following mediation by the President as NRM Chairman, a consent order was endorsed on 21 August 2012 before an Assistant/Deputy Registrar, in which the applicant conceded all grounds of appeal and prayers, with each party bearing its own costs. The applicant was subsequently appointed Presidential Advisor on poverty alleviation. In 2015 she applied to set aside the consent order, alleging her signature was forged and that she was never a party to it. The respondents contended she was present, signed willingly, and benefited from the arrangement, and that the appeal had become moot since the 2nd respondent had served as MP until 2016.
Issues
- Whether the applicant's signature on the consent order was procured by fraud or forgery so as to justify setting it aside.
- Whether the Assistant/Deputy Registrar of the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to sign a consent order determining an election petition appeal.
- Whether parties may by consent overturn the decision of the lower court without the appeal being heard.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Consent order entered on 21st August 2012 set aside.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 (as amended)
- Parliamentary Elections (District Woman Representatives) Regulations 2001
- Court of Appeal Rules r.94(3)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 135(1)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 125(1)
Cases cited (7)
- Hirani v Kassam (1952) 19 EACA 131
- Attorney General v James Mark Kamoga (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2004)
- Zaabwe Fredrick v Orient Bank (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
- The Environment Action Network Ltd v Joseph Eryau (Civil Application No. 98 of 2005)
- Edith Nantumbwe Kizito v Miriam Kutesa (Civil Application No. 294 of 2013)
- Bulasio Konde v Bulandina Nankya (Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1980)
- Lees v Motor Insurers' Bureau [1953] WLR 620
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.