Wakilii

Global Paper Products Limited v Uganda National Examinations Board (Application 11 of 2024)

Tribunal · [2024] UGPPDPAAT 15 · 2024 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of administrative review decision concerning cancellation of disposal tender process
Decision
Administrative review decision set aside; Tribunal substituted its own cancellation of the disposal process; administrative review fees refunded to applicant

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 Tribunal held that a procuring entity cannot cancel a disposal process after contract award has been made by the Contracts Committee. The purported cancellation on 29 January 2024 was illegal as it occurred after the Contracts Committee had already awarded the contract on 24 November 2023, contrary to section 75(1) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act which permits cancellation only before contract award.

Outcome

Administrative review decision set aside; Tribunal substituted its own cancellation of the disposal process; administrative review fees refunded to applicant

Facts

Uganda National Examinations Board initiated a tender for disposal of waste paper/old scripts for two years in October 2023. Six bidders submitted bids. During evaluation, an arithmetic correction changed Hanan Contractors' bid from UGX 1,098,000,000 to UGX 1,878,800,000. The Evaluation Committee recommended Hanan Contractors as best evaluated bidder. Global Paper Products complained to the Public Procurement Authority about alleged bid tampering. On 24 November 2023, the Contracts Committee approved the evaluation report and decided to award the contract to Hanan Contractors. On 16 January 2024, the user department requested pending of the disposal process to allow for digitisation of scripts. On 25 January 2024, the Contracts Committee approved cancellation of the disposal process. On 29 January 2024, the Accounting Officer communicated the cancellation to all bidders. Global Paper Products filed an administrative review complaint which was dismissed, leading to this application to the Tribunal.

Issues

  1. Whether the Application is competent?
  2. Whether the administrative review decision of the Executive Director of the Respondent was valid?
  3. Whether the cancellation of the disposal process was lawful?
  4. Whether the cancellation of the disposal process was tantamount to contempt of the Authority's orders?
  5. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The application is allowed in part.
  • The decision of the Accounting Officer of the Respondent dated February 9, 2024 is set aside.
  • The Respondent's impugned cancellation of the process for the disposal of waste paper/old scripts for two (2) years under disposal reference no. UNEB/DISP/23-24/00003, is cancelled.
  • The Tribunal substitutes the impugned cancellation with its own cancellation of the disposal process.
  • The Respondent shall refund the Applicant's administrative review fees.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs of the proceedings.

Rules and key headnotes

Public Procurement — Tribunal Jurisdiction — Cancellation Before Contract Award
The Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Tribunal has jurisdiction to inquire into whether a cancellation decision was made in compliance with section 75 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act, including the power to determine the existence or non-existence of a valid cancellation decision, but has no jurisdiction to review the reasons for a cancellation that was properly effected in accordance with section 75.
Public Procurement — Presumption of Regularity — Accounting Officer
Where an official act has been done, it will be presumed until the contrary is proved that the act complied with necessary formalities and that the person who did it was duly appointed. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Executive Director of a public entity will be presumed to be authorised to perform the functions of Accounting Officer for purposes of administrative review under the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act.
Public Procurement — Cancellation — Timing Requirement
A procurement or disposal process can only be cancelled before contract award under section 75 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act. A purported cancellation effected after the Contracts Committee has already made a contract award is illegal and contrary to section 75(1) of the Act.
Public Procurement — Contract Award Distinguished from Contract
An award decision is not a contract. A valid and enforceable contract comes into force only after fulfilment of the requirements in sections 76(2) and 76(3) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act and the procedures in the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (Contracts) Regulations. The Tribunal cannot compel a procuring and disposing entity to enter into a contract merely because there has been a contract award.
Public Procurement — Tribunal Remedies — Substituted Cancellation
Where the Tribunal finds that a cancellation is illegal, it may substitute its own cancellation or refer the matter back to the procuring and disposing entity for further proceedings not inconsistent with the Tribunal's decision. However, where the entity is unwilling to proceed with the procurement process, it would be futile to refer the matter back, and the Tribunal will substitute its own cancellation of the process.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (11)

  • Mulago Hill Diagnostics Ltd v National Water and Sewerage Corporation (Application No. 13 of 2022)
  • Preg Tech Communications v Uganda Police (Application No. 32 of 2021)
  • Mugerwa Fred v Sembabule District Local Government (Application No. 23 of 2022)
  • Impiger Technologies Private Limited v Higher Education Students Financing Board (Application No. 25 of 2022)
  • Kingdom Kampala v Judicial Service Commission (Application No. 34 of 2022)
  • Jacob Mutabazi v The Seventh Day Adventist Church (Civil Appeal No. 088 of 2011)
  • Quality Inspection Services Inc. Japan and Others v UNBS (Applications No. 15, 17 and 18 of 2023)
  • Galleria in Africa Ltd v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2017)
  • Preg Tech Communications v Uganda Police Force (Application No. 32 of 2021)
  • Kingdom Kampala Limited v Judicial Service Commission (Application No. 34 of 2022)
  • Seyani Brothers & Co. (U) Ltd and Parbat Siyani Construction Ltd v Directorate of Government Analytical Laboratory (Application No. 40 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Global Paper Products Limited v Uganda National Examinations Board (Application 11 of 2024) 2024 UGPPDPAAT 15 (18 March 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.