East Africa Gold Sniffing Company Ltd v Attorney General (Misc Cause No. 88 of 2012)

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.

Holding

The High Court held that Hima Cement Limited was a non-existent legal entity, as the purported change of name from Hima Cement (1994) Limited was void for non-compliance with the Companies Act. A non-existent entity cannot be a person aggrieved under Section 118 of the Mining Act and cannot request administrative review. The Minister therefore lacked jurisdiction to conduct the administrative review. The court granted an order of certiorari quashing the Minister's decision and restored Exploration Licence Number 0932 to the applicant.

Outcome

The Minister's decision set aside by order of certiorari; Exploration Licence Number 0932 restored to the applicant

Facts

The applicant, East Africa Gold Sniffing Company Ltd, was granted Exploration Licence Number 0932 by the Commissioner of Geological Survey and Mines on 30th January 2012. Hima Cement Limited, purporting to be a successor entity to Hima Cement (1994) Limited which held Special Mining Lease 3480 over the same area, requested the Minister to conduct an administrative review under Section 118 of the Mining Act to set aside the Commissioner's decision. The applicant challenged this, arguing that Hima Cement Limited was a non-existent legal entity. The applicant presented evidence from the Registrar of Companies showing no record of a lawful change of name. The Minister proceeded with the administrative review and set aside the grant of Exploration Licence Number 0932. The applicant then applied for judicial review seeking to quash the Minister's decision.

Issues

1. Whether the Minister of Energy and Mineral Development had jurisdiction to review the decision of the Commissioner of Geological Survey and Mines under Section 118 of the Mining Act 2003 in the absence of a request for administrative review made by a person aggrieved.
2. Whether the request for administrative review made by Hima Cement Limited on 28th February 2012 was a request of the person envisaged under Section 118 of the Mining Act.
3. Whether Hima Cement Limited exists as a legal person capable of commencing administrative review proceedings.
4. Whether the Minister acted ultra vires in setting aside the Commissioner's decision to grant Exploration Licence Number 0932 to the applicant.
5. Whether the administrative review proceedings and the Minister's decisions were tainted with procedural impropriety and irrationality.

Orders

• Declaration granted that the Minister does not have jurisdiction to review the Commissioner's decision under Section 118 of the Mining Act in the absence of a request by a person aggrieved.
• Declaration granted that the request for administrative review made by Hima Cement Limited on 28th February 2012 was not a request of the person envisaged under Section 118 of the Mining Act.
• Declaration granted that the preliminary decision of the Minister dated 26th April 2012 is illegal.
• Declaration granted that the Minister acted ultra vires and the final decision arising out of the administrative review proceedings is null and void.
• Order of certiorari granted to quash the final decision of the Minister dated 26th April 2012.
• Order granted to restore the status quo of Exploration Licence Number 0932 as it was before the Minister's decision.
• Costs of the application awarded to the applicant to be borne by the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (30)

• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.33
• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.36
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.3
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.6
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.7
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.10
• Mining Act 2003 s.118
• Mining Act 2003 s.119(1)(b)
• Mining Act 2003 s.119(1)(c)
• Mining Act 2003 s.119(2)
• Mining Act 2003 s.121
• Mining Act 2003 s.47
• Mining Act 2003 s.91
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 r.1
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 r.3
• Mining Regulations SI 71 of 2004 Regulation 48(3)
• Mining Regulations SI 71 of 2004 Regulation 54(4)
• Mining Regulations SI 71 of 2004 Regulation 8(c)
• Mining Act Cap 148 s.49
• Mining Act Cap 148 s.51
• Companies Act s.18
• Companies Act s.19
• Companies Act s.2
• Evidence Act Cap 6 s.75
• Evidence Act Cap 6 s.77(1)(d)
• Interpretation Act Cap 3 s.2(z)
• Constitution of Uganda 1995 National Objective XII
• Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 175
• Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 244(1)
• Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 26

Cases cited (21)

• Aggrey Bwire v Attorney General and the Judicial Services Commission (Civil Appeal No. 09 of 2009)
• Uganda Freight Forwarders Association & Anor v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 22 of 2009)
• Kilembe Mines Limited v Uganda Goldmines Ltd (Misc Application No. 312 of 2012)
• Proline Soccer Academy Ltd v Lawrence Mulindwa & Ors (HCMA No. 459 of 2009)
• John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council (CA No. 353 of 2005)
• Kampala District Land Board & Anor v Sadrudin Alirazak Panjjwani & Ors (CA No. 83 of 2006)
• Gordon Sentiba & Others v URA (HCMC No. 35 of 2010)
• Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister of Civil Service (1984) 3 All ER 943
• Associated Provincial Picture House Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1947) 2 All ER 680
• Fam International Ltd & Anor v Mohamed Hamid El-Fatih (SCCA No. 16 of 1993)
• Uganda v Shanitah Namuyimba alias Bad Black & Anor (CR.SC No. 102 of 2011)
• Mohammed Zziwa Kizito & Others v Spidiqa Umma Foundation (HCCS No. 12 of 2008)
• Macfoy v United Africa Co. Ltd (1961) 3 All ER 1169
• Re Nakivubo Chemists (1575) MCB 12
• Mohamed Allibhai v W.T Bu.kenya and DAPC
• Semakula Haruna v Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd (HCCS No. 432 of 2009)
• Ex parte Side Botham, In re Side Botham (1880) 14 Ch D 458
• Kuluo Joseph Andrew & 2 Others v Attorney General & Others (MC No. 106 of 2010)
• Ndawula Ronald v Hajji Nadduli (Election Appeal No. 20 of 2006)
• John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council & Two Others (High Court Civil Application No. 78 of 2005)
• Fort Hall Bakery

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