[2017] UGHCCD 56
The court held that the applicant's claims, which included wrongful or unfair termination, payment of compensatory and punitive damages, and salary arrears, required the presentation and evaluation of evidence. Such matters fall outside the scope of judicial review, which is limited to reviewing the legality of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] UGHCCD 56
- Parties
- Applicant: Benard Tumwesigire; Respondent: Minister for Finance, Planning, Economic Development; Respondent: Departed Asians Property Custodian Board; Respondent: Sam Male
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE No. 164 of 2016.
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judicial Review
- Outcome
- application dismissed for being brought under the wrong procedure
- Judges
- Musota, J
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Wrongful Termination, Salary Arrears, Procedure Incorrect Filing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Benard Tumwesigire
Applicant
Minister for Finance, Planning, Economic Development
Respondent
Departed Asians Property Custodian Board
Respondent
Sam Male
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judicial Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's claims for wrongful dismissal and salary arrears are amenable to judicial review.
- 2 Whether the application was properly brought under judicial review procedure.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant's claims, which included wrongful or unfair termination, payment of compensatory and punitive damages, and salary arrears, required the presentation and evaluation of evidence. Such matters fall outside the scope of judicial review, which is limited to reviewing the legality of administrative actions rather than adjudicating substantive employment disputes. The court found that the applicant should have filed the matter as an ordinary suit under the Employment Act, not as a judicial review application. Consequently, the application was dismissed for being brought under the wrong procedure.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for being brought under the wrong procedure
Orders
- The application is dismissed for having been brought under the wrong procedure.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
**THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**
**CIVIL DIVISION**
**MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE No. 164 of 2016.**
**IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW**
**BENARD TUMWESIGIRE :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPLICANT**
***Versus***
1. **MINISTER FOR FINANCE, PLANNING ,**
**ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT**
1. **DEPARTED ASIANS PROPERTY CUSTODIAN RESPONDENTS**
**BOARD**
1. **SAM MALE**
**BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE STEPHEN MUSOTA**
**RULING**
This is an application by way of Notice of Motion for Judicial Review under Articles 42, 50 and rules 3, 5 and 3 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 SI 11 of 2009.
The applicant seeks for orders of Certiorari quashing the decision by the respondents causing the wrongful dismissal, Prohibition stopping the 1st respondent from implementing directives and Mandamus to the respondents to carry out a statutory duty of paying the applicants salary arrears.
Counsel for the applicant filed detailed written submissions but the respondents did not because the application proceeded exparte after the respondents failed to file their respective affidavits in reply. After a careful perusal of the application and supporting affidavit and considering the sum total of the reliefs being sought, I am of the considered view that this matter does not fall under Judicial Review.
This matter does not fall under the ambit of Judicial Review because all the issues the applicant is seeking to resolve need to be proved by evidence which cannot be effectively handled under Judicial Review. Some of the complaints concern employment disputes for wrongful or unfair termination, payment of compensatory and punitive damages as well as severance pay. Several of the claims date as long ago as 2007, 2009, and 2010
Since this is a matter regarding employment, the applicant ought to have brought this matter under Employment Act and by ordinary plaint. I therefore order that this matter br dismissed for having been brought under the wrong procedure.
I will make no order as to costs.
**Stephen Musota**
**J U D G E**
**20.02.2017**
**20.02.2017:-**
Mr. Ruyondo for the applicant.
Applicant in Court.
None for the Respondents.
Milton Court Clerk.
**Mr. Ruyondo:-**
We are here for a Ruling.
**Court:-**
Ruling read and delivered to the Applicant.
**AJIJI ALEX MACKAY**
**DEPUTY REGISTRAR**
**20.02.2017**