The court considered issues of whether the defendant took over lawfully, whether the defendant refused to consecrate and enthrone the Bishop-Elect and whether the plaintiffs were entitled to the remedies sought.

As regards the first issue, it was found that the practice was that the outgoing Bishop remained until a new one is consecrated and enthroned. Thus the takeover by the defendant was found to be unlawful and irregular.

Concerning the second issue, court found that the defendant had not exercised his discretion lawfully to have the Bishop-Elect consecrated and enthroned.

As regards issue three, the court ordered that the defendant consecrates and enthrones the Bishop-Elect as he was duly elected.

However, the court made no order of injunction against the defendant in view of his general powers of leadership of the Province of the church of Uganda.