Chogm Tour Agents (2007) (U) Ltd v Masaka Municipal Council Local Government (Civil Appeal No. 32 of 2009)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
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 dismissed an appeal against the High Court's refusal to grant judicial review of a halted revenue-collection procurement process. The court held that the PPDA acted lawfully under section 91 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 when, on receiving complaints, it suspended the procurement and directed extension of an existing contract. Since the process was halted before the appellant submitted its bid, and mere picking of bid forms conferred no enforceable legal right, the appellant had no protectable interest. The advertisement inviting tenders was an invitation to treat, not an offer. The respondent was bound to follow the PPDA's recommendations. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent; High Court dismissal of judicial review upheld
Facts
The respondent municipal council advertised for tenders for collection of revenue from taxi parks and markets in Masaka Municipality. The appellant and three other firms picked bid forms, initially to be opened on 19 September 2008, later extended to 1 October 2008. Following complaints to the PPDA, particularly by Equator Touring Services Ltd, the executive director of the PPDA invited council officers to a meeting on 22 September 2008, at which it was agreed that the ongoing procurement process be halted and Equator's existing contract be extended. On 24 September 2008 the PPDA directed the town clerk to comply. On 3 November 2008 the town clerk informed bidders the process was halted. The appellant, having submitted its bid on 29 September 2008, was dissatisfied and applied to the High Court for judicial review seeking certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. The High Court dismissed the application, prompting this appeal.
Issues
- Whether the actions of the respondent and the PPDA in halting the procurement process and extending an existing contract were illegal.
- Whether the mere picking of bid forms conferred on the appellant enforceable legal rights capable of protection by judicial review.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed for lack of merit.
- Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 s.7
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 s.8
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 s.10
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 s.91
- Local Government (Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets) Regulations 2006 reg.57
- Local Government (Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets) Regulations 2006 reg.136
Cases cited (2)
- Makula International Vs His Emminance Cardinal Nsubuga & Another [1982] HCB.11
- Mistry Amar Sing Vs Serwano Wafura Kulubya [1963] WLR
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.