Wakilii

Dr. Sadat Ssemakula Mutyaba Mohmeded v Gulu University (Miscellaneous Application 50 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 1071 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of High Court orders and for injunctive relief, arising from dismissed judicial review application (Misc. Cause No. 002 of 2024), which is now the subject of Civil Appeal No. 707 of 2024
Decision
Application dismissed with costs. The applicant remains dismissed from employment and cannot claim deemed suspension under section 57(5) of Cap 262.

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

Application dismissed. The court held that section 57(5) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act Cap 262, which deems a dismissed staff member to be suspended pending appeal, does not apply where the applicant failed to properly engage the internal Staff Tribunal process before seeking judicial review. The applicant improperly and concurrently engaged both the Staff Tribunal and court processes, constituting abuse of process. Having been dismissed and given that section 57(5) does not avail to him, the status quo is that the applicant is out of employment, and the court cannot prevent the respondent from filling the vacant Dean position.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs. The applicant remains dismissed from employment and cannot claim deemed suspension under section 57(5) of Cap 262.

Facts

The applicant, Dr. Shadat Ssemakula Mutyaba Mohmemed, was dismissed by Gulu University from his position as Senior Lecturer and Dean Faculty of Law on 1 February 2024. His Deanship was supposed to expire in 2026. On 15 February 2024, he simultaneously filed an appeal to the University Staff Tribunal and lodged Miscellaneous Cause No. 002 of 2024 seeking judicial review. The judicial review application was dismissed by the High Court on 27 May 2024 on the ground that the applicant had not exhausted internal appeal processes under section 57(1) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act Cap 262. The applicant appealed that decision (Civil Appeal No. 707 of 2024). The present application sought to stay execution of the High Court's orders pending appeal and to restrain the respondent from filling the position of Dean Faculty of Law. The applicant argued he is deemed suspended under section 57(5) of Cap 262 until all legal processes are exhausted. The respondent opposed, arguing the application was moot, that the applicant had not properly invoked internal remedies, and that the status quo is that the applicant was dismissed and is no longer in employment.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should stay execution of its orders given in Miscellaneous Cause No. 002 of 2024 pending appeal.
  2. Whether the court should grant injunctive relief to prevent the respondent from filling the position of Dean Faculty of Law.
  3. Whether the applicant is deemed suspended under section 57(5) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act Cap 262 pending resolution of his appeal.

Orders

  • Miscellaneous Application No. 50 of 2024 dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent, to be paid by the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Employment & Labour — University Staff Dismissals — Internal Appeals — Section 57 Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act Cap 262
Section 57(5) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act Cap 262, which deems a dismissed university staff member to be suspended until expiry of the appeal period or determination of an appeal, only aids a person who has properly engaged the appeal process set out under section 57(1) to (4), namely an appeal to the University Staff Tribunal against the decision of the Appointments Board, followed where necessary by judicial review under section 57(3).
Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Exhaustion of Remedies — Premature Applications
A staff member who simultaneously files an appeal to the University Staff Tribunal and seeks judicial review in the High Court, without first waiting for the Tribunal to hear and determine the matter under section 57(2) of Cap 262, acts in flagrant disregard of section 57 of Cap 262 and rule 7A(1)(b) of the Judicial Review Rules, and such conduct constitutes abuse of legal process.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Discretionary Power — Section 98 Civil Procedure Act
A stay of execution under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 is a matter for the court's discretion and no litigant has an absolute entitlement to it. The discretion must be exercised judicially and on well-established principles.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Requirements — Substantial Loss and Irreparable Damage
For a stay of execution to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate that execution would cause substantial loss or irreparable damage, that the appeal would be rendered nugatory, and that the respondent would be incapable of restoring the status quo ante should the applicant succeed on appeal. The law recognizes that not all orders or decrees appealed from have to be stayed pending appeal, and an appeal may be determined without having to grant a stay.
Civil Procedure — Status Quo — Definition and Application
Status quo denotes the state of affairs existing before a particular point in time. Where a university staff member has been dismissed and section 57(5) of Cap 262 does not apply, the status quo is that the staff member is out of employment, and the court cannot prevent the university from filling the vacant position in execution of its statutory mandate.

Legislation cited (15)

Cases cited (26)

  • Attorney General of Uganda v Media Legal Defence Initiative (MDLI) & 19 Others (Appeal No. 3 of 2016)
  • Mario Ali v Opoka Santo (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 14 of 2022)
  • Mansukhlal Ramji Karia & Another v Attorney General (Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2002)
  • Hwan Sung Limited v M and D Timber Merchants and Transporters Limited (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2018)
  • Walimu Cooperative Savings and Credit Union v Okumu Benjamin & Another (Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 101 of 2022)
  • Makerere University v St. Mark Education Institute (High Court Civil Suit No. 378 of 1993)
  • Byamukama Edson v Makerere University Council (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 312 of 2008)
  • Dr. Runumi Mwesigye Francis v The Returning Officer, Electoral Commission & Another (Election Petition No. 02 of 2002)
  • Okwonga George & Another v Okello James Harrison (Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 132 of 2021)
  • Yoakim Mwene Habyene v Attorney General (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1996)
  • Mugenyi & Co. Advocates v National Insurance Corporation (Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1984)
  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye [1990] UGSC 13
  • Kaggwa v Kawalya-Kaggwa (Administration Cause No. 21 of 1972)
  • Ms. Fang Min v Bellex Tours and Travel Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 06 of 2013)
  • DFCU Bank Ltd v Dr. Ann Persis Nakate Lusejjere (Civil Application No. 29 of 2003)
  • Joseph v Jebeile (1963) 1 GLR 387
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal Application No. 341 of 2013)
  • Hon. Gerald Kafureeka Karuhanga & Kiiza Eron v The AG and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 060 of 2015)
  • AG & Another v James Mark Kamoga & Another (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2004)
  • Makerere University v Omubejja Namusisi Farida Naluwembe Namirembe Bwanga (Miscellaneous Application No. 658 of 2013)
  • Akankwasa Damian v Uganda (Constitutional Application No. 7 and 9 of 2011)
  • Theodore Ssekikubo & 3 Others v Attorney General & 4 Others (Supreme Court Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
  • Gashumba Maniraghua v Sam Ndukiye (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
  • Wilson v Church (No. 2) (1879) 12 Ch D 458
  • National Housing & Construction Corporation v Kampala District Land Board & Another (Civil Application No. 6 of 2002)
  • Somali Democratic Republic v Anoop S. Sunderlal Trean (Civil Application No. 11 of 1988)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Dr. Sadat Ssemakula Mutyaba Mohmeded v Gulu University (Miscellaneous Application 50 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 1071 (25 November 2024)
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.