Share
Mabirizi v Attorney General (Civil Application No. 40 of 2022) [2022] UGCA 43 (25 February 2022)
- Citation
- [2022] UGCA 43
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- Court of Appeal of Uganda
- Panel
- Madrama, JA
- Case number
- Civil Application No. 40 of 2022
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Appeal of Uganda
- Panel
- Madrama, JA
- Case number
- Civil Application No. 40 of 2022
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that the reference to the full bench was appropriate to determine whether the High Court decision dated 15th February 2022 was a separate decision or covered by the notice of appeal, and whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to consider those orders. The single justice declined to grant temporary relief from imprisonment, finding himself functus officio and unable to reverse his previous decision under rule 2(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The applicant was directed to formulate specific grounds of reference within seven days and advised to apply afresh to the full bench or seek bail pending appeal or application as appropriate.
Court disposition
reference_granted_in_part
Orders
- Reference to the full bench of the Court of Appeal is granted to consider the jurisdictional issue and coverage of the notice of appeal.
- Applicant to formulate specific grounds of reference within 7 days.
- Application for temporary relief from imprisonment is declined.
02
Material facts
Parties
Male H. Mabirizi K. Kiwanuka
ApplicantAttorney General
Respondent Counsel: Ms Mutesi03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Application / Reference to Full Bench
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the decision of the High Court dated 15th February 2022 is a separate decision or covered by the notice of appeal.
- 02
Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to consider the High Court orders and grant temporary interim relief from imprisonment.
- 03
Whether the applicant is entitled to temporary relief from imprisonment pending reference to the full bench.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that sections 76 and 77 of the Civil Procedure Act allow a notice of appeal to cover any interlocutory decisions made in the cause appealed from, and that the single justice erred by not considering this. He sought a reference to the full bench and temporary relief from imprisonment pending the reference.
- Respondent
- The respondent, represented by Ms Mutesi, conceded to the reference application, agreeing that the matter should be referred to the full bench for determination of whether the High Court decision was covered by the notice of appeal and whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Sections 76 and 77 of the Civil Procedure Act
A notice of appeal may cover interlocutory decisions made in the cause appealed from.
- 02
Rule 2(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules
The inherent powers of the court under rule 2(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules do not extend to reversing a previous decision where the judge is functus officio.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that the reference to the full bench was appropriate to determine whether the High Court decision dated 15th February 2022 was a separate decision or covered by the notice of appeal, and whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to consider those orders. The single justice declined to grant temporary relief from imprisonment, finding himself functus officio and unable to reverse his previous decision under rule 2(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The applicant was directed to formulate specific grounds of reference within seven days and advised to apply afresh to the full bench or seek bail pending appeal or application as appropriate.
Obiter and limits
- The applicant shall formulate specific grounds of reference in his own words in writing within 7 days from today.
- The applicant may apply afresh to the full bench or seek bail pending appeal or application as appropriate.
Court disposition
reference_granted_in_part
- Reference to the full bench of the Court of Appeal is granted to consider the jurisdictional issue and coverage of the notice of appeal.
- Applicant to formulate specific grounds of reference within 7 days.
- Application for temporary relief from imprisonment is declined.
Source and reliance status
Court of Appeal 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.
Court of Appeal of Uganda
Judgment
| 5 | THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA, | |----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA | | | IN THE MATTER OF REFERENCE TO FULL BENCH FOR DECISIOB OF A<br>SINGLE JUSTICE OF APPEAL | | | (ARISTNG FRoM CrVtL AppLtCATtoN N0 40 0F 2022) | | 10 | IARISTNG oUT 0F CtVtL AppLtCATtoN N0. 39 OF 20221 | | | IARISTNG 0UT 0F HrGH CoURT MTSCELLANEoUS AppLlCATtoN NO 843 OF<br>20211 | | | IAR SING oUT 0F H GH CoURT MTSCELLANEoUS CAUSE N0 287 OF 20211 | | | MALE H MABTR Z K. KTWANUKA)<br>APPLLLICANT | | 15 | VERSUS | | | ATTORNEY GENERAL}<br>RESPONDENT |
RULING OF CHRISTOPHER MADRAMA, JA
After delivery of ruling in Civil Apptication No 40 of 2022,the Appticant Mr Male H. Mabirizi K. Kiwanuka apptied to refer my decision to the futI bench of the Court of Appeat on the ground that the sections 76 and 77 of the Civit Procedure Act, a[[ows a notice of appeaI to cover any interlocutory
decisions made in the cause appeated from and I had erred not to consiCg.r this.
25 Ms Mutesi, Assistant Commissioner who represented the Attorney GeneraI conceded to the reference application.
Accordingly, a reference is hereby made for the futt bench to consider whether the decision of the High Court dated 15th of February 2022 is <sup>a</sup> separate decision or not covered by the notice of appeaI and this court erred to hotd that it had no jurisdiction to consider those orders and grant the applicant temporary interim relief from imprisonment.
s The Applicant shatl formulate specific grounds of reference in his own words in writing within 7 days from today.
Secondty, the Appticant sought a temporary retief from imprisonment on terms of court pending reference to the futt bench under the inhererrt powers of the court encapsulated in rute 2 (2) of the Rutes of this court.
10 I had ruled in the main apptication that I had no jurisdiction to retease the Appticant on the ground that he had no pending appeat from the decision of the High court dated 15'h of February 2022 in respect of alteged additionat contempts of court.
ln the premises, I am functus officio and cannot stretch rule 2 (2) of the 1s Rutes of this court to reverse myself by making a positive order to release the appticant. I decline to release the applicant. Let him appty afresh to the fu[[ bench or apply to be released on bail pending appeal or apptication whichever remedy is appropriate.
Dated at Kampala the 25th of February,2022.
Christopher Madrama
Justice of Appeal
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.