zziwa v Nabagesera (Civil Appeal 34 of 1996)

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 Court of Appeal upheld a preliminary objection and dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Section 96(1) of the Parliamentary Election (Interim Provisions) Statute No. 4 of 1996 confers a right of appeal only against a High Court decision determining an election petition, not against interlocutory orders. A right of appeal must be created by express enactment and none existed for interlocutory orders. The order vacating the stay of proceedings did not finally determine the petition and was therefore interlocutory. As the trial judge's decision was not predicated on Order 42 of the Civil Procedure Rules, it could not be characterised as arising from an independent right of review, and no appeal lay.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction; the order appealed from was held to be interlocutory.

Facts

The appellant was the third respondent in Election Petition No. 11 of 1996 in the High Court at Kampala. On 30 August 1996, upon the appellant's application, the trial court ordered a stay of hearing of the election petition pending disposal of an appeal against the court's refusal to grant leave to appeal an interlocutory order. On 29 September 1996, the respondent moved the trial court, citing rule 24 of S.I. 21 of 1996 (the election petition rules), Order 42 of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 101 of the Civil Procedure Act, to review and set aside the stay order. On 3 October 1996, the trial court vacated its earlier stay order, citing the letter and spirit of the election petition rules requiring expedition. The trial judge did not determine whether Order 42 applied. The appellant appealed against that decision to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

1. Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against an interlocutory order made by the High Court in the course of hearing an election petition.
2. Whether the order vacating the stay of proceedings was an interlocutory order or an appealable decision arising from an independent right of review.

Orders

• Preliminary objection upheld.
• Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Parliamentary Election (Interim Provisions) Statute No. 4 of 1996 s.96(1)
• Civil Procedure Act s.83
• Civil Procedure Act s.101
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 42
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 42 rule 1
• Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules 1996 (S.I. 21 of 1996) rule 24
• Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules 1996 rule 17

Cases cited (2)

• Margaret Zziwa v Catherine Naava Nabagesera (Parliamentary Election Petition Misc. Application No. 9 of 1996)
• Total Oil Products E.A v NUAUTO Ltd and others [1968] EA 611

Cases citing this judgment (1)

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.

• The Returning Officer Kampala and Anor vs Margaret Zziwa (Civil Appeal No 39 of 1997) followed

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