[2006] UGSC 9

[2006] UGSC 9

The Supreme Court held that the right to petition the Constitutional Court under Article 137 is a personal right granted to every individual and does not constitute property within the meaning of Article 26(2) of the Constitution. The right to petition is not inheritable and abates upon the death of a sole...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] UGSC 9
Parties
Appellant: Phillip Karugaba; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Supreme Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Property, Constitutional Petitions, Chose in Action, Succession of Rights, Abatement of Petition
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Right to Property Constitutional Petitions Chose in Action Succession of Rights Abatement of Petition

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Karugaba

Appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Appeal / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the right to petition the Constitutional Court under Article 137 of the Constitution constitutes property within the meaning of Article 26(2) of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether Rule 15 of the Rules of the Constitutional Court (Petition for Declarations under Article 137 of the Constitution Directions 1996) is inconsistent with Article 26(2) of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the right to petition abates upon the death of a sole petitioner and can be inherited by successors in title.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the right to petition the Constitutional Court under Article 137 is a personal right granted to every individual and does not constitute property within the meaning of Article 26(2) of the Constitution. The right to petition is not inheritable and abates upon the death of a sole petitioner. Rule 15 of the Constitutional Court Rules, which provides for such abatement, is not inconsistent with the constitutional protection of property. The Court distinguished between rights that are inheritable property and personal rights granted by the Constitution, finding that only rights capable of ownership, exclusivity, and compensable value qualify as property. The appeal...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs in the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court.