[2006] UGHC 45

[2006] UGHC 45

The applicant failed to demonstrate any of the legal grounds required for review under Section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. There was no discovery of new and important evidence, no mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, and no sufficient cause shown. The court emphasized that the power to review is not to be exercised for convenience or as an alternative to appeal, and that the law regulating pleadings and affidavits in election petitions must be strictly adhered to. The applicant's arguments did not satisfy the statutory requirements for review, and the application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2006] UGHC 45
Parties
Applicant: Ongole James Michael; Respondent: Electoral Commission; Respondent: Ebukalin Sam
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
5 December 2006
Case Number
Misc. Application No. 46/2006
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Admission of Affidavits, Election Petition Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Election Petitions Review of Court Orders Admission of Affidavits Election Petition Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ongole James Michael

Applicant

Electoral Commission

Respondent

Ebukalin Sam

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has met the legal requirements for review of the court's order rejecting late affidavits.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's affidavits in rejoinder and two other affidavits should be admitted in evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice require the admission of the late affidavits.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any of the legal grounds required for review under Section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. There was no discovery of new and important evidence, no mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, and no sufficient cause shown. The court emphasized that the power to review is not to be exercised for convenience or as an alternative to appeal, and that the law regulating pleadings and affidavits in election petitions must be strictly adhered to. The applicant's arguments did not satisfy the statutory requirements for review, and the application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant's affidavits in rejoinder and two other affidavits are not admitted in evidence.