Wakilii

In the matter of application by way of Judicial Review between Mbabazi RoselynTusiime v Attorney General & Anor (Miscellaneous Cause No. 0061 of 2019)

High Court · [2019] UGHC 21 · 2019 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review by way of mandamus to compel payment of a taxed costs award
Decision
Order of mandamus granted; respondents directed to pay UGX 71,607,820 plus costs or provide bank guarantee

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 granted an order of mandamus directing the Attorney General and Treasury Officer of Accounts to pay UGX 71,607,820 in taxed costs to the applicant, being a judgment creditor. The court held that the respondents were obligated under Section 19 of the Government Proceedings Act to satisfy the judgment decree after being served with a certificate of order, and that the circumstances warranted mandamus under Section 37 of the Judicature Act.

Outcome

Order of mandamus granted; respondents directed to pay UGX 71,607,820 plus costs or provide bank guarantee

Facts

The applicant was awarded costs in Miscellaneous Application No. 15 of 2017, with the court ordering the Attorney General to pay the taxed costs. The applicant extracted a Certificate of Taxation and Certificate of Order against Government and served them on the respondents. The applicant's lawyers made written demand for payment to the Attorney General without success. The applicant then brought this application for judicial review by way of mandamus to compel payment of UGX 71,607,820 in taxed costs. The respondents were served but did not file a reply. The application proceeded ex parte.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant an order of mandamus to compel the respondents to pay the taxed costs award of UGX 71,607,820/=.

Orders

  • An order of mandamus directing the Attorney General and Treasury Officer of Accounts, Ministry of Finance, to pay UGX 71,607,820/= and the taxed costs of the proceedings to the Applicant.
  • Alternatively, the Respondents shall execute a bank guarantee to secure the decreed amount with costs.
  • The Respondents shall bear the costs of this application.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Mandamus — Conditions for Grant — Enforcement of Court Orders
An order of mandamus will be granted to compel a public officer to perform a statutory duty where a judgment creditor has obtained a certificate of order against government, served it on the respondents, and the respondents have failed without lawful excuse to satisfy the judgment.
Administrative Law — Government Proceedings — Obligation to Satisfy Judgments
Under Section 19 of the Government Proceedings Act, the Attorney General and Treasury Officer of Accounts are obligated to satisfy a judgment decree after being served with a certificate of order against government.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Unchallenged Evidence
Where a party is duly served but chooses not to reply to an application, the court may allow the matter to proceed ex parte and enter judgment on the basis of unchallenged affidavit evidence.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (2)

  • Goodman Agencies Ltd and 3 Others versus Attorney General and Another, High Court Commercial Division, Kampala
  • Frank Milenge and 10 Others v Attorney General and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 81 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

In the matter of application by way of Judicial Review between Mbabazi RoselynTusiime Vs Attorney General & Anor (Miscellaneous Cause No. 0061 of 2019) [2019] UGHC 21 (11 September 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.