Administrative Law

Muriisa Nicholas v Attorney General & 3 Ors (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO. 035 OF 2012) [2012] UGHC 113 (26 June 2012);


Search Summary: 

In this case the applicant sought court for orders injunction and mandamus. This was
to restrain the first three respondents from allowing the fourth to continue occupying
the office of local council three and the first respondent be compelled to implement
high court and court of appeal orders.

Headnote and Holding: 

Court considered whether there had been contempt of court orders by the respondents
and if so the remedies available. Court held that there had been contempt of court by
the respondents. Court was satisfied that there had been court orders for the fourth
respondent to vacate office of local council three and fresh elections to be held yet the
respondents continued acting in a way as if there were not concerned by the orders
issued. For that matter as remedies, the fourth respondent was to vacate office and the
rest of the respondents do what must be done according to the previous court orders.
Accordingly court granted the applicant’s application for judicial review.


Subscribe to RSS - Administrative Law