[2022] UGCA 129
The Court, guided by the responsibility of advocates to their clients and the duty to dispense substantive justice, accepted the parties' consent to withdraw the applications seeking to strike out the appeal. The Court allowed the validation of the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal in Election Petition...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] UGCA 129
- Parties
- Applicant: Mujungu Jennifer; Respondent: Tumwine Anne Mary; Respondent: Electoral Commission
- Court
- Court of Appeal of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Election Petition Appeal No. 26 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition Application / Ruling on Application for Extension and Validation
- Outcome
- Application for extension and validation allowed by consent; related applications withdrawn; each party to bear own costs.
- Judges
- Kiryabwire, JA, Musota, JA, Gashirabake, JA
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Validation of Appeal Documents, Withdrawal of Applications, Consent Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mujungu Jennifer
Applicant
Tumwine Anne Mary
Respondent
Electoral Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition Application / Ruling on Application for Extension and Validation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the time within which to file and serve the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal in Election Petition Appeal No. 77 of 2021 should be extended or validated.
- 2 Whether Applications No. 25 of 2022 and No. 29 of 2022 seeking to strike out the appeal should be withdrawn by consent of the parties.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court, guided by the responsibility of advocates to their clients and the duty to dispense substantive justice, accepted the parties' consent to withdraw the applications seeking to strike out the appeal. The Court allowed the validation of the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal in Election Petition Application No. 26 of 2022, holding that the extension and validation were justified in the interests of justice. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs, reflecting the consensual resolution of the procedural dispute.
Court Disposition
Application for extension and validation allowed by consent; related applications withdrawn; each party to bear own costs.
Orders
- Time for filing and serving the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal in Election Petition Appeal No. 77 of 2021 is extended and/or validated.
- Applications No. 25 of 2022 and No. 29 of 2022 are withdrawn by consent of the parties.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
#### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
# IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA (COA)AT KAMPAI. A
## ELECTION PETITION APPLICATION NUMBER 0026 OF 2022
MUJUNGU JENNIFER ( ========= <sup>=</sup>APPLICANT
VS
1. TUMWINE ANNE MARY 2. ELECTORALCOMMISSION
=RESPONDENTS
# CORAM: HON. MR. JUSTICE GEOFFREY KIRYABWIRE, JA
# HON. MR. JUSTICE MUSOTA STEPHEN, JA
# HON. MR. JUSTICE GASHIRABAKE CHRISTOPHER, JA
## RULING OF COURT
This is an Application by way of Notice of Motion under Rules 19 & 35 of the Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Sl L4L-2, Rules 2(2) & 5 of the Judicature (court of Appeal) Rules Directions s.l 13-10 seeking for orders that time within which to file and serve Memorandum of Appeal and the Record of Appeal in Election Petition Appeal No.77 of 2O2t be extended and/or to validate the Memorandum of Appeal and the Record of Appeal in this Appeal and the costs of Application.
When this Application was called up for hearing, Counsel Jude Byamukama appeared for the Applicant, Mr. Thomas ochaya & Esawa lsingoma represented the 1't Respondent and Mr. Erick Sabit for the 2nd Respondent.
court found that there also existed another Application No. 25 of 2022, which was filed on 15th February, 2022by the 1't Respondent seeking to strike out the Appeal
and also Application No. 29 of 2022 filed by the 2nd Respondent (Electoral Commission) on 17th Februa ry,2022 also seeking the same Orders on substantially the sa me grou nds.
For purposes of case management, court inquired whether lawyers could extend professionalcourtesies across the bar and accept the validation in this Application and withdraw Applications No. 25 of 2022 and No. 29 of 2022 and deal with the Appeal. Mr. Thomas Ochaya for the Applicant in Application No. 25 of <sup>2022</sup> informed Court that he had no instructions to withdraw the Application. For such reasons the hearing was stood over for the lawyers to consult their respective clients.
When court resumed, Mr. Thomas Ochaya informed Court that he had now received instructions to withdraw the Application and Mr' Eric Sabit for the Application No. 29 of 2022 also conceded to withdraw the Application.
### Consideration of court.
After guidance by Court on the role of Advocates to their clients and responsibility to the Court to dispense substantive justice the parties by consent agreed to withdraw the Applications.
This Court by reason of the consent of the parties now allows the validation in Election Petition Application No. 26 of 2022, and the withdrawal of Applications No.25 of 2022 and No.29 of 2022 by reason of the said concessions each party bearing their own costs.
Dated at Kampala this l--. tr day of t< 4t. <sup>H</sup> 2022.
,
HON. MR. JUSTICE GEOFFREY KIRYABWIRE
JUSTICE OF APPEAT
HON. MR. JUSTICE MUSOTA STEPHEN
JUSTICE OF APPEAT
HON. MR. JUSTICE GASHIRABAKE CHRISTOPHER
JUSTICE OF APPEAL