Uganda Management Institute Governing Council and Another v Dr. Benon Basheka (Civil Appeal No. 97 of 2013)

Court of Appeal · [2022] UGCA 361 · 2022 Appeal Partly Allowed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

First appeal from the High Court's grant of an application for judicial review

Decision

Appeal substantially succeeded; the DFA contract renewal upheld but the DPSA appointment renewal quashed by certiorari

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court of Appeal held that a PhD is not a mandatory qualification for the office of a UMI Director, since a UMI Director is equivalent to a Deputy Vice Chancellor and not a Head of Department, and no law, the UMI Frameworks, or the NCHE Quality Assurance Framework prescribes a PhD for that office. The trial court erred in quashing Mr. Bbosa's contract renewal on that basis. However, the Director of Programs and Student Affairs is an academic post, so the renewal of Mr. Kasozi Mulindwa's contract without the recommended qualification and without a competitive process was procedurally irregular. The appeal substantially succeeded, but the certiorari quashing the DPSA appointment was sustained.

Facts

In 2007 and 2008, Mr. Lukonji Bbosa and Mr. Kasozi Mulindwa were appointed Director of Finance and Administration (DFA) and Director of Programs and Students Affairs (DPSA) respectively at the Uganda Management Institute. Their contracts were renewed by the UMI Governing Council on 16 December 2011. Dr. Benon Basheka, a Senior Lecturer and Head of the Higher Degrees Department, challenged the renewals by judicial review, contending they flouted the UMI Frameworks and Procedures adopted in September 2011, were made without a search committee, advertisement, or interview, and that the Directors lacked PhDs required of a Head of Department under the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act and the NCHE Quality Assurance Framework. The trial court allowed the application, declared the appointments illegal and irregular, and quashed them. The appellants appealed, arguing the renewals complied with the Frameworks and that a PhD was not a requirement for the office of Director, whose post is equivalent to a Deputy Vice Chancellor rather than a Head of Department.

Issues

Whether a PhD was a mandatory requirement for the appointment and renewal of the contracts of the Directors of the Uganda Management Institute.
Whether the renewal of contracts originally made before the UMI Frameworks and Procedures could be effected under the new Frameworks, or had to be treated as fresh appointments.
Whether the office of Director of Programs and Student Affairs was an academic post requiring a competitive recruitment process.

Orders

A declaration issues that a PhD is not a mandatory requirement or qualification for the appointment and renewal of the contracts of the Directors of UMI per se, but is advisable for the position of Director of UMI responsible for academic affairs.
The appeal substantially succeeds but the orders of the trial court with regard to the irregularity of the contract renewal are sustained in so far as they pertain to the position of Director of Programs and Student Affairs.
A declaration issues that the renewal of Mr. Kasozi Mulindwa's appointment as Director Programs and Student Affairs on 16th December 2011 was irrational and irregular, and ought to be quashed.
An order of certiorari issues to call and quash the irregular appointment and Minutes of the First Appellant in which the said appointment was made.
Costs in this Court and the trial court are awarded to the appellants (60% in the lead judgment).

Key headnotes

Judicial Review — Pleadings — Scope of Affidavit Evidence

A court will not treat all matters set forth in an affidavit in support of an application as being in issue between the parties unless they are expressly designated as such in the application; the relief sought delineates the matters in contention.

Contract Renewal — Effect of New Governing Framework on Pre-Existing Contracts

A running contract entered under a previous employment regime may be renewed under a subsequently adopted framework where neither the principal statute nor the framework prohibits such renewal or requires the contract to be treated as a fresh appointment.

Qualifications for Office — No Implied Requirement Where Statute Silent

Where the principal Act, the institutional framework, and the relevant quality assurance framework are all silent on the minimum qualifications for an office, a court cannot import a qualification such as a PhD applicable to a different office into that silent position.

Public Office — Director of UMI Equated to Deputy Vice Chancellor, Not Head of Department

Under the modified provisions of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act applicable to UMI, a UMI Director is the equivalent of a Deputy Vice Chancellor and not a Head of Department, so qualification requirements for a Head of Department do not automatically apply to a UMI Director.

Judicial Review — Procedural Irregularity in Academic Appointments

Renewing the contract of a holder of an academic office without the recommended qualification and without the competitive recruitment process prescribed in the applicable framework constitutes a procedural irregularity warranting certiorari, though it does not necessarily amount to illegality where no minimum qualification is expressly prescribed.

Legislation cited (14)

Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.31
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.32(1)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.32(2)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.32(3)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.32(4)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.51(1)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.51(2)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.53(1)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.54(1)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001 s.54(3)
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions (Amendment) Act 2006 s.13
Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions (Amendment) Act 2006 s.19
Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.30(1)(a)
Civil Procedure Act s.27(2)

Cases cited (3)

Henru Kifamu v Uganda Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997 (Supreme Court)
Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
Goustar Enterprise Ltd v John Kokas Oumo (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2003)

Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.