In Critique of pure reason, Kant mentions the theory of space and time, which is a priori. It will be used in Heidegger's Being and Time. However, In his second meditation, it seems that Descartes eliminated space and time. Any relation between them in terms of space and time.
A few points:
Kant did indeed say that space and time can be known a priori as the forms of outer and inner sense, and this idea and Kant's broader system did indeed inform the whole subsequent development of German idealism from which, in part, phenomenology through Husserl and Heidegger etc. developed. Later Husserl is basically an evolution of Transcendental Idealism.
Descartes's point is more epistemological than ontological - he doesn't say that there is no space and time he says that we cannot be certain, the external world can be doubted, and then goes onto reconstruct certainty (although his method for doing this not fashionable as it involves proving the existence of God!) so he ends up showing that space and time are there after all.
It is often said that the discovery that the geometry of the world is non-Euclidean refuted Kant. But there is I think a very strong argument that this is too simplistic. If you have patience for some maths a great book on this is The Reign of Relativity by Thomas Ryckman. Basically, while transcendental idealist ideas clearly need to be updated to account for physical discoveries since Kant's day they were actually very influential on some of the pioneers of relativity theory, most notably Hermann Weyl who was deeply influenced by Husserl, and one of the most significant mathematical physicists of the twentieth century. In addition to his work on the formulation of relativity theory, Weyl's work - explicitly influenced by Husserl! (who btw took his doctorate in mathematics) - is foundational to modern gauge symmetry and gauge theories including the standard model.