Share
Attorney General & Another v Kasango (Constitutional Application 2 of 2021) [2021] UGSC 2 (31 March 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] UGSC 2
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- Supreme Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC
- Case number
- Constitutional Application 2 of 2021
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC
- Case number
- Constitutional Application 2 of 2021
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Supreme Court found that the application raised substantially important points of law that warranted the grant of an interim stay of execution. Exercising its discretion under Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules, the Court determined that it was just and equitable to preserve the status quo by staying the execution of the Constitutional Court's orders in Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 dated 18th March, 2021. The interim order was granted to remain in force until the disposal of the substantive application for stay of execution or any other order of the Court. The Court also directed that costs would be in the cause.
Court disposition
application allowed; interim stay of execution granted
Orders
- An interim order is granted staying execution of the orders of the Constitutional Court in Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 dated 18th March, 2021.
- The interim order shall remain in force until the disposal of Constitutional Application No. 1 of 2021 for stay of execution or any other order of the Supreme Court.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
02
Material facts
Parties
Attorney General
ApplicantDirector of Public Prosecutions
ApplicantBob Kasango
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Constitutional Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Interim Stay Application
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicants are entitled to an interim stay of execution of the orders of the Constitutional Court pending determination of the substantive application for stay.
- 02
Whether the matters raised in the application constitute substantially important points of law warranting the grant of an interim order.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants contend that the matters raised in the application are of substantial importance and that unless an interim stay is granted, the execution of the Constitutional Court's orders will render the substantive application nugatory.
- Respondent
- The application was heard ex-parte; no arguments from the respondent are on record.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules
The court may grant an interim stay of execution where substantial points of law are raised and to preserve the status quo pending determination of the substantive application.
- 02
General principles of stay of execution in constitutional matters
Interim orders are discretionary and are granted to prevent irreparable harm or to avoid rendering the substantive application nugatory.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Supreme Court found that the application raised substantially important points of law that warranted the grant of an interim stay of execution. Exercising its discretion under Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules, the Court determined that it was just and equitable to preserve the status quo by staying the execution of the Constitutional Court's orders in Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 dated 18th March, 2021. The interim order was granted to remain in force until the disposal of the substantive application for stay of execution or any other order of the Court. The Court also directed that costs would be in the cause.
Court disposition
application allowed; interim stay of execution granted
- An interim order is granted staying execution of the orders of the Constitutional Court in Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 dated 18th March, 2021.
- The interim order shall remain in force until the disposal of Constitutional Application No. 1 of 2021 for stay of execution or any other order of the Supreme Court.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Uganda
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Uganda
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
CORAM: OWINY - DOLLO C. J; ARACH-AMOKO; OPIO-AWERI; MUGAMBA; MUHANGUZI; JJ. S. C.
CONSTITUTIONAL APPLICATION NO. 02 OF 2021
(Arising from Constitutional Application No. 1 of 2021 and Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016)
1. ATTORNEY GENERAL 15
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
VERSUS
BOB KASANGO::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
$\mathsf{S}$
RULING OF THE COURT
We have heard this application ex-parte pursuant to the powers of this Court under Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules.
We have given the application due consideration.
We find that the matters raised in the application are substantially important points of law for the Court's consideration
Accordingly, we allow the application and hereby grant an 30 interim order staying the execution of the orders of the Constitutional Court in Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 dated 18<sup>th</sup> March, 2021.
$\mathbf{1}$
This Order shall remain in force till the disposal of the $\mathsf{S}$ substantive application No. 1 of 2021, for stay of execution or any other order of this Court.
Costs shall be in the cause.
Dated at Kampala this 31<sup>st</sup> day of March, 2021
Alfonse C. Owiny - Dollo 15 Chief Justice Stella Arach-Amoko Justice of the Supreme Court 20 Rubby Opio-Aweri Justice of the Supreme Court $25$ Paul Mugamba Justice of the Supreme Court 30 Ezekiel Muhanguzi Justice of the Supreme Court 35
$\overline{2}$
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.