[2017] UGHCCD 193

[2017] UGHCCD 193

The respondent was ordered by consent to provide the applicant with records of proceedings from both the University Staff Tribunal Appeal Case No.2 of 2014 and the University Appointments Board Case No.2 of 2012. The respondent only provided the former, claiming the latter did not exist due to lack of a hearing. However, documentary evidence and the respondent's own averments indicated that a hearing did occur and records should exist. The respondent failed to challenge or seek variation of the order at the time it was made, and did not prove on a balance of probability that the records were unavailable. The respondent's partial compliance constitutes contempt of court, as court orders...

Citation
[2017] UGHCCD 193
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Charles Twesigye; Respondent: Kyambogo University
Court
HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
1 August 2017
Case Number
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 120 OF 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
Musota, J
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Mandamus Orders, Right to Fair Hearing, University Disciplinary Proceedings
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Contempt of Court Mandamus Orders Right to Fair Hearing University Disciplinary Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Charles Twesigye

Applicant

Kyambogo University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is in contempt of court for failing to provide the applicant with all records of proceedings as ordered.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's failure to provide the records violates the applicant's right to appeal and right to a fair hearing.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to damages and a fine for contempt of court.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was ordered by consent to provide the applicant with records of proceedings from both the University Staff Tribunal Appeal Case No.2 of 2014 and the University Appointments Board Case No.2 of 2012. The respondent only provided the former, claiming the latter did not exist due to lack of a hearing. However, documentary evidence and the respondent's own averments indicated that a hearing did occur and records should exist. The respondent failed to challenge or seek variation of the order at the time it was made, and did not prove on a balance of probability that the records were unavailable. The respondent's partial compliance constitutes contempt of court, as court orders...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The respondent is found in contempt of court for failing to provide the required records of proceedings.
  • The respondent shall pay exemplary damages of UGX 20,000,000 to the applicant, with interest at court rate from the date of ruling until payment in full.