Wakilii

Engineer Fredrick Mubiru v Engineers Registration Board (Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 58 · 2026 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from administrative decision of Engineers Registration Board suspending appellant's registration
Decision
Suspension order quashed and set aside; appellant's registration restored

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 High Court held that the Engineers Registration Board violated the appellant's constitutional right to a fair hearing by failing to disclose the full investigative report on which the disciplinary proceedings were based, thereby denying him an effective opportunity to rebut the allegations. The Court quashed the suspension, holding that a decision made in violation of natural justice principles is void and legally ineffective. The appeal was allowed with costs but without damages.

Outcome

Suspension order quashed and set aside; appellant's registration restored

Facts

The appellant, a registered engineer, was accused of professional misconduct by the National Building Review Board (NBRB), which referred the matter to the Engineers Registration Board (ERB). On 3 July 2024, ERB suspended the appellant for one year. The appellant successfully appealed (Civil Appeal No. 87 of 2024), and the High Court set aside the suspension, directing ERB to conduct a proper disciplinary hearing observing natural justice principles. ERB reconstituted its disciplinary committee and held a hearing on 28 January 2025. The committee recommended suspension for one year, which ERB imposed on 24 April 2025. The appellant appealed again, alleging violations of his right to a fair hearing, including failure to disclose the full investigative report, failure to establish guilt, and actual bias by ERB.

Issues

  1. Whether the Engineers Registration Board accorded the appellant a fair hearing in accordance with principles of natural justice.
  2. Whether the decision of the Engineers Registration Board to suspend the appellant's registration can be maintained or set aside.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • The decision by the Engineers Registration Board dated 24/04/2025 suspending the appellant from practice is hereby quashed and set aside, having been made in violation of the principles of natural justice.
  • The appellant is awarded the costs of this appeal.
  • Claims for general damages of UGX 200,000,000 and aggravated damages of UGX 100,000,000 declined for lack of evidence.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Right to Fair Hearing — Disclosure of Evidence
The rule of fair hearing demands full disclosure of all evidential facts and documents proposed to be used against a party, in order to provide an opportunity to correct and contradict anything prejudicial. Failure to supply the full investigative report to the accused before a final decision is taken constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Right to Know the Case Against One
If the right to be heard is to be a real right, it must carry with it the right of the accused to know the case made against him, to know what evidence has been given and what statements have been made affecting him, and to be given a fair opportunity to correct or contradict them.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Effect of Violation
A decision made in violation of the principles of natural justice is void and legally ineffective. It is immaterial whether the same decision would have been arrived at in the absence of the departure from the essential principles of justice; the decision must be declared to be no decision.
Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Appellate Jurisdiction over Administrative Bodies
Under Section 27 of the Engineers Registration Act Cap 299, the High Court has broad discretion to give such directions as it thinks proper in appeals against decisions of the Engineers Registration Board to suspend registration, and the decision of the High Court is final.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Context-Dependent Requirements
The requirements of natural justice depend on the circumstances of the case, the nature of the inquiry, the rules under which the tribunal is acting, and the subject matter being dealt with. While administrative bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions are not bound by strict civil or criminal trial procedures, they must observe the fundamental principles of natural justice.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (16)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Engineer Fredrick Mubiru v Engineers Registration Board (Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2025) [2026] UGHCCD 58 (13 March 2026)
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.