Share
Kyagulanyi v Museveni & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2021) [2021] UGSC 68 (19 February 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] UGSC 68
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- Supreme Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Kisaakye, JSC, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mwondha, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2021
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Kisaakye, JSC, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mwondha, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2021
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The majority of the Supreme Court found that the applicant had not met the necessary legal requirements for the orders sought in the application. The court exercised its discretion to disallow the application, holding that the interests of justice and the procedural framework governing presidential election petitions did not warrant the grant of the orders requested. The application was therefore dismissed by a majority decision, with costs to be determined in the main cause.
Court disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is disallowed by a majority of eight to one.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
02
Material facts
Parties
Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert
ApplicantYoweri Museveni Tibuhaburwa
RespondentElectoral Commission
RespondentAttorney General
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application by the applicant should be allowed in the context of the presidential election petition.
- 02
Whether the applicant has met the legal requirements for the orders sought.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Counsel for the applicant submitted that the application was necessary for the just determination of the presidential election petition and that the applicant was entitled to the orders sought under the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions.
- Respondent
- Counsel for the respondents opposed the application, arguing that the applicant had not satisfied the legal requirements for the orders sought and that the application should be disallowed.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Constitution of the Republic of Uganda; Presidential Elections Act
Applications arising from presidential election petitions must satisfy the requirements set out in the Constitution and the Presidential Elections Act.
- 02
Supreme Court Rules
The court exercises discretion in granting or refusing interlocutory applications based on the merits and compliance with procedural requirements.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The majority of the Supreme Court found that the applicant had not met the necessary legal requirements for the orders sought in the application. The court exercised its discretion to disallow the application, holding that the interests of justice and the procedural framework governing presidential election petitions did not warrant the grant of the orders requested. The application was therefore dismissed by a majority decision, with costs to be determined in the main cause.
Court disposition
application dismissed
- The application is disallowed by a majority of eight to one.
- 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; KISAAKYE; ARACH-AMOKO; OPIO-AWERI; MWONDHA; MUGAMBA; MUHANGUZI; TUHAISE; CHIBITA; JJ. S. C;
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 04 OF 2021
(Arising from Presidential Petition No. 1 of 2021)
KYAGULANYI SSENTAMU ROBERT::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PPLICANT/PETITIONER 15
VERSUS
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
- 1. YOWERI MUSEVENI TIBUHABURWA - 2. ELECTORAL COMMISSION
3. ATTORNEY GENERAL
RULING OF THE COURT
We have given due consideration to the application and submissions of Counsel for the Applicant and for the Respondents.
By a majority of eight (8) to one (1), this Court disallows this application. Costs shall be in the cause.
The detailed reasons for the ruling will be contained in the detailed Judgment.
Dated at Kampala this 19<sup>th</sup> day of February, 2021 30
Alfonse C. Owiny - Dollo Chief Justice
$\mathbf{1}$
$25$
Dr. Esther Kisaakye Justice of the Supreme Court
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.....................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stella Arach-Amoko
Justice of the Supreme Court
Ruby Opio-Aweri Justice of the Supreme Court
nhuerDere
Faith Mwondha Justice of the Supreme Court
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Paul Mugamba
Justice of the Supreme Court
Ezekiel Muhanguzi Justice of the Supreme Court
Percy Night Tuhaise Justice of the Supreme Court
Mike Chibita Justice of the Supreme Court
$\overline{2}$
$25$
$\overline{5}$
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.