[2015] UGHCFD 22

[2015] UGHCFD 22

The court found that the Administrator General has a statutory duty to issue a certificate of no objection to an applicant nominated by the majority of beneficiaries, unless there is a compelling legal reason not to do so. The respondent's continued delay and reliance on the dissent of a single family member, as well as the prospect of mediation that was never pursued, amounted to irrationality and procedural impropriety. The court held that the existence of a family dispute or the possibility of a caveat does not justify indefinite delay in performing a statutory duty. The proper forum for resolving substantive objections is the High Court upon application for letters of administration,...

Citation
[2015] UGHCFD 22
Parties
Applicant: Betty Daisy Kampororo Kaliisa; Applicant: Evelyn Kaliisa Nyakaana; Applicant: Trudy Ofwono Kaliisa; Applicant: Suzan Kaliisa; Applicant: Julius Kaliisa; Applicant: Lt. Cleophas Kaliisa; Applicant: Stella Kaliisa Birungi; Respondent: The Administrator General
Court
HC: Family Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
6 July 2015
Case Number
Divorce Cause No. 63 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judicial Review (mandamus, Certiorari, Prohibition)
Outcome
Application partly allowed. Mandamus and prohibition granted; certiorari denied. Each party to bear own costs.
Judges
Tuhaise, J
Legal Topics
Letters of Administration, Judicial Review, Administrator General Duties, Estate Management, Mandamus, Prohibition
Source Language
English
Family and Children Administrative Law Letters of Administration Judicial Review Administrator General Duties Estate Management Mandamus Prohibition

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Betty Daisy Kampororo Kaliisa

Applicant

Evelyn Kaliisa Nyakaana

Applicant

Trudy Ofwono Kaliisa

Applicant

Suzan Kaliisa

Applicant

Julius Kaliisa

Applicant

Lt. Cleophas Kaliisa

Applicant

Stella Kaliisa Birungi

Applicant

The Administrator General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judicial Review (mandamus, Certiorari, Prohibition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's refusal to issue a certificate of no objection to the applicant is ultra vires or shows impropriety.
  2. 2 Whether the Administrator General can be compelled by mandamus to issue a certificate of no objection where the majority of beneficiaries have nominated an administrator.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's delay or refusal to issue the certificate is justified by the existence of family disputes or pending civil suits.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Administrator General has a statutory duty to issue a certificate of no objection to an applicant nominated by the majority of beneficiaries, unless there is a compelling legal reason not to do so. The respondent's continued delay and reliance on the dissent of a single family member, as well as the prospect of mediation that was never pursued, amounted to irrationality and procedural impropriety. The court held that the existence of a family dispute or the possibility of a caveat does not justify indefinite delay in performing a statutory duty. The proper forum for resolving substantive objections is the High Court upon application for letters of administration,...

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed. Mandamus and prohibition granted; certiorari denied. Each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • An order of mandamus directing the Administrator General to issue the 5th applicant Julius Kaliisa a certificate of no objection to apply for letters of administration in respect of the estate of his late father Francis Muntukwonka Kaliisa.
  • An order of prohibition to forbid the respondent from making any future decision that will be ultra vires in the management of the estate.