Hon. Ssali Isaac Keith and Another v H.W Mayor Regina Bakitte Nakazzi Musoke and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 11 of 2019)
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 dismissed a judicial review application challenging the Mayor's decision to revoke the applicants' appointments as Deputy Mayor and Executive Secretary. The court held that under sections 18(3) and 20(a) of the Local Governments Act, the Mayor possessed statutory authority to nominate and revoke appointments of executive committee members without following a hearing procedure. The revocation was within the four corners of the statute and not ultra vires, though the power must be exercised reasonably and in good faith. No costs were awarded as the matter was of public interest.
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed; termination/revocation of applicants' appointments upheld as lawful
Facts
The applicants were directly elected councillors of Nansana Municipal Council who were nominated by the 1st respondent (the Mayor) and approved by the Council to serve as Deputy Mayor and Secretary for Finance, and Secretary for Production, Marketing, Environment and Cooperatives respectively. They served in these executive positions for over two and a half years. On 8 November 2018, the Mayor terminated their appointments without a prior hearing. The Mayor stated her reason was to give chance to other people to bring new skills, ideas and knowledge and to have more balanced representation in the Municipality. The applicants challenged the termination by way of judicial review, arguing they were denied fair hearing and that the decision violated principles of natural justice and administrative law.
Issues
- Whether the 1st Respondent followed procedure in terminating the Applicants from holding executive positions in Nansana Municipal Council.
- Whether the termination was lawful.
- Whether the 2nd Respondent is liable for the actions of the 1st Respondent.
- Whether the Applicants are entitled to the reliefs sought in the application.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- No order as to costs since it was a matter of public interest.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (19)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 (as amended) Article 2
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 (as amended) Article 28(1)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 (as amended) Article 42
- Judicature Act s.33
- Judicature Act s.36
- Judicature Act s.37
- Judicature Act s.38
- Civil Procedure Act s.64
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.3(1)
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.3(2)
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.6
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.8
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.2
- Local Governments Act s.18(1)
- Local Governments Act s.18(3)
- Local Governments Act s.20(a)
- Interpretation Act s.24
Cases cited (5)
- John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 353 of 2005)
- DOTT Services Ltd v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 125 of 2009)
- Balondemu David v The Law Development Centre (Miscellaneous Cause No. 61 of 2016)
- Commissioner of Land v Kunste Hotel Ltd [1995-1998] 1 EA (CAK)
- R v Lord President of the Privy Council, ex parte Page [1993] AC 682
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.