[2018] UGHCLD 62

[2018] UGHCLD 62

The High Court found that the Commission of Inquiry and the IGG acted ultra vires and irrationally by issuing recommendations and commencing investigations into compensation for land that had already been decided by a court order. The Commission of Inquiry has no mandate to vary or countermand court orders, and the IGG is statutorily barred from reviewing or questioning court decisions. The affidavits relied upon by the respondent were defective and lacked evidential value. The applicant's facts, being unchallenged, were accepted as true. The actions of the Commission and IGG were declared illegal, irrational, and ultra vires, and the application for judicial review was granted with...

Citation
[2018] UGHCLD 62
Parties
Applicant: Walugembe Daniel; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
30 November 2018
Case Number
Misc.Civil Cause No.231 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
Bashaija, J
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition, Ultra Vires Actions, Res Judicata, Injunctions
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Certiorari Prohibition Ultra Vires Actions Res Judicata Injunctions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walugembe Daniel

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether this is a fit and proper case for judicial review.
  2. 2 Whether Allan Mukama, State Attorney, has capacity to depone to matters concerning the Commission of Inquiry and IGG.
  3. 3 Whether the Commission of Inquiry is mandated to issue orders contrary to court decisions or judgments in respect of the same subject matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the Commission of Inquiry and the IGG acted ultra vires and irrationally by issuing recommendations and commencing investigations into compensation for land that had already been decided by a court order. The Commission of Inquiry has no mandate to vary or countermand court orders, and the IGG is statutorily barred from reviewing or questioning court decisions. The affidavits relied upon by the respondent were defective and lacked evidential value. The applicant's facts, being unchallenged, were accepted as true. The actions of the Commission and IGG were declared illegal, irrational, and ultra vires, and the application for judicial review was granted with...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing the recommendation/order/decision of the Commission of Inquiry contained in a letter dated 02/08/2018 to the Chairman ULC directing compensation in respect of land in issue be paid to the landlords contrary to the High Court ruling.
  • Order of prohibition prohibiting Ministry of Finance Officials, the ULC, and any other Government Department or official from implementing the recommendation, decision, or order of the Commission of Inquiry contained in the letter dated 02/08/2018.