[2012] UGCA 61

[2012] UGCA 61

The Court of Appeal unanimously held that the intention expressed in its previous judgment regarding the guardianship order would only be fully realized by deleting condition 1(e). The application for review was granted, and condition 1(e) was deleted as prayed. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] UGCA 61
Parties
Applicant: Andrew Daniel Ribbens; Applicant: Sara Anne Marie Shepard Ribbens; Applicant: Matthew John Zimmermann; Applicant: Audrey Finitane Green Zimmerman; Respondent: Deborah Joyce Alitubeera; Respondent: Richard Masaba
Court
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Application No. 38 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Outcome
application_granted
Judges
Mpagi-Bahigeine, DCJ, Nshimye, JA, Arach-Amoko JA
Legal Topics
Guardianship Order, Review of Judgment, Child Welfare
Source Language
en
Family and Children Guardianship Order Review of Judgment Child Welfare

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Daniel Ribbens

Applicant

Sara Anne Marie Shepard Ribbens

Applicant

Matthew John Zimmermann

Applicant

Audrey Finitane Green Zimmerman

Applicant

Deborah Joyce Alitubeera

Respondent

Richard Masaba

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the court should review its earlier judgment to delete condition 1(e) as prayed by the applicants.
  2. 2 Whether the deletion of condition 1(e) will give full effect to the court's intention regarding the guardianship order.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal unanimously held that the intention expressed in its previous judgment regarding the guardianship order would only be fully realized by deleting condition 1(e). The application for review was granted, and condition 1(e) was deleted as prayed. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to ensure its orders accurately reflected its intention and the best interests of the children involved.

Court Disposition

application_granted

Orders

  • Condition 1(e) in the previous judgment is deleted as prayed.
  • The application for review is granted.