[2015] UGHCCD 80
The court found that the grounds for appeal revolved around important legal points upon which the decision was made. The applicants' desire to test these findings at a higher level should not be unreasonably restricted. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal, recognizing that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] UGHCCD 80
- Parties
- Applicant: Jasper Mayeku & 198 Ors; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Jeff Lawrence; Respondent: Jamal Kitandwe
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Misc. Application No. 618 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal After Ruling
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Grounds of Appeal, Duress, Undue Influence
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jasper Mayeku & 198 Ors
Applicant
Attorney General
Respondent
Jeff Lawrence
Respondent
Jamal Kitandwe
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal After Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted following the ruling.
- 2 Whether the issues of duress and undue influence are proper grounds for appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the grounds for appeal revolved around important legal points upon which the decision was made. The applicants' desire to test these findings at a higher level should not be unreasonably restricted. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal, recognizing that the applicants are entitled to challenge all the findings, including those relating to duress and undue influence, before an appellate court.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted to the applicants.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
**THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**
**CIVIL DIVISION**
**MISC. APPLICATION NO. 618 OF 2014**
*(Arising from H. C. M. C 153 OF 2011)*
*(Arising from H. C. C. S No. 164 of 2004)*
**JASPER MAYEKU & 198 ORS ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPLICANTS**
***VERSUS***
**1. ATTORNEY GENERAL**
**2. JEFF LAWRENCE :::::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENTS**
**3. JAMAL KITANDWE**
**BEFORE: HON. MR. JUSTICE STEPHEN MUSOTA**
**RULING:**
After delivering my ruling Mr. Rwakafuzi learned counsel for the applicants orally applied for leave to appeal the ruling although the rules require that a formal application has to be filed in the circumstances. Learned counsel contended that serious issues especially on duress and undue influence were raised.
Both Mr. Madete and Mr. Matovu for the respondents opposed the application for leave to appeal. They argued respectively that the issues of duress and undue influence were not issues for determination by this court. That these were offshots to the courts findings. That if the applicants wanted to appeal, they only have to appeal within the four issues raised at the trial in rejoinder, Mr. Rwakafuuzi clarified that he intended to appeal against all the four grounds including duress.
I have considered the application for leave to appeal. I note that learned counsel for the applicants wishes to appeal against all the findings on the grounds in the application. The grounds revolved around important legal points upon which I made my decisions. The applicants’ wishes to test the findings at a higher level will not be unreasonably fettered. Accordingly, leave to appeal will be granted.
**Stephen Musota**
**J U D G E**
**19.08.2015**
Ruling delivered in the presence of Mr. Matovu John for the second and third respondent who are present.
Court Clerk Ms Naggayi Imelda
**Festo Nsenga**
**Ag. Deputy Registrar**
**20.08.2015**