Wakilii

Hellenahs Restaurant Bar Ltd V The Parliamentary Commission 3 Others (MISC APPLICATION NO 741 OF 2018)

High Court · [2019] UGHCCD 194 · 2019 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for temporary injunction arising from judicial review proceedings challenging procurement decision
Decision
Temporary injunction refused; judicial review application to proceed

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 refused a temporary injunction to prevent Parliament from operating its restaurant through a new contractor pending judicial review. The applicant failed to demonstrate a prima facie case with high chances of success or irreparable loss. The balance of convenience favored the respondents as the applicant's expired contract had already been extended almost a year beyond its term, and granting the injunction risked causing the respondents to breach their new contract.

Outcome

Temporary injunction refused; judicial review application to proceed

Facts

The applicant operated a restaurant and bar at Parliament House under a contract that expired. The contract had been extended for almost a year beyond its official term. The respondents decided not to renew the contract and contracted another party to provide restaurant services. The applicant filed judicial review proceedings (Misc. Cause 309 of 2018) challenging this decision and sought an extension of time and a temporary injunction (Misc. Application 741 of 2018) to maintain the status quo. The court granted the extension of time and issued an interim injunction. The respondents raised preliminary objections to the temporary injunction application and the Attorney General sought to be struck off as a party.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from altering the status quo regarding the operation of the Members' restaurant and bar at Parliament House pending determination of the judicial review application.
  2. Whether the Attorney General should remain as the 4th Respondent where individual institutions are sued.
  3. Whether the applicant satisfied the requirements for a temporary injunction.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection that there was no temporary injunction application before court dismissed.
  • Attorney General struck off as the 4th Respondent.
  • Temporary injunction application denied.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Interim Relief — Temporary Injunction — Requirements
For a temporary injunction to succeed, the applicant must demonstrate a prima facie case with high chances of success and that if the injunction is not allowed, the applicant would suffer irreparable loss. If the court is in doubt of these two requirements, then the court makes a determination based on the balance of convenience.
Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Temporary Injunction — Balance of Convenience
In determining whether to grant a temporary injunction pending judicial review of a procurement decision, where the applicant's contract has expired and been extended beyond its term, and the respondent has entered a new contract with another party, the balance of convenience favors allowing the respondent to proceed with the new contractor rather than risk breach of contract claims and loss of public funds.
Civil Procedure — Parties — Attorney General — When Attorney General Should Be Struck Off
Where an applicant has sued individual government institutions directly concerned with the matter, it is unnecessary for the applicant to also sue the Attorney General, and the Attorney General may be struck off as a party.
Civil Procedure — Temporary Injunction — Irreparable Loss — Business Entities
A business entity that fails to demonstrate it would suffer irreparable loss if an injunction is not granted can be adequately compensated in damages if it succeeds in the main application.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hellenahs Restaurant Bar Ltd V The Parliamentary Commission 3 Others (MISC APPLICATION NO 741 OF 2018) 2019 UGHCCD 194 (15 January 2019)
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.