Wakilii

Makerere University v Makerere University Staff Tribunal and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 164 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 80 · 2026 Judicial Review Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review of a decision of the Makerere University Staff Tribunal
Decision
Application for judicial review granted; Tribunal decision quashed; enforcement of Tribunal orders prohibited

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 Makerere University has locus standi to bring judicial review proceedings against decisions of its Staff Tribunal under Article 42 of the Constitution. The Tribunal's decision in Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022 was quashed as illegal because the appeal was filed outside the mandatory 14-day statutory period prescribed by Section 57(1) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act, and the Tribunal rendered its decision outside the mandatory 45-day period under Section 57(2). Statutory time limits are mandatory and cannot be extended by judicial discretion.

Outcome

Application for judicial review granted; Tribunal decision quashed; enforcement of Tribunal orders prohibited

Facts

Francis Ninyenda was a procurement officer at Makerere University appointed in 2009. In 2017, during procurement for the 67th graduation ceremony, he allegedly altered an approved bidding document. An investigation committee found him guilty. On 21 November 2017, the Appointments Board demoted him from rank M6 to M7 and redeployed him. Ninyenda first sought judicial review in the High Court, which was dismissed for failure to exhaust local remedies. He then filed a labour complaint which was referred back to the University Staff Tribunal. On 14 April 2022, he lodged Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022. The Tribunal found in his favour on 19 June 2024, ordering his reinstatement, salary arrears, retirement contributions, and interest. Makerere University then sought judicial review of the Tribunal's decision, arguing the appeal was filed outside the statutory 14-day period and the Tribunal decided outside the statutory 45-day period.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is properly before the Court (locus standi).
  2. Whether the application raises grounds for judicial review.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The 1st Respondent's ruling in Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022 was done outside the statutory time limit and is therefore illegal and set aside.
  • The 1st respondent did not have jurisdiction to handle an appeal filed outside the statutory time limit of 14 days.
  • An Order of Prohibition issues prohibiting the 2nd Respondent and all those claiming under him from enforcing the 1st Respondent's orders in Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022.
  • An Order of Certiorari issues quashing the ruling and orders of the 1st Respondent in Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022 delivered on 19th June 2024.
  • A Permanent Injunction issues restraining the 2nd Respondent and all those claiming under him from enforcing the orders of the 1st Respondent in Staff Appeal No. 09 of 2022.
  • Each party shall bear its costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Locus Standi — Universities as Legal Persons
A university, as a legal person, has locus standi to bring judicial review proceedings against decisions of its own Staff Tribunal under Article 42 of the Constitution, which guarantees any person the right to just and fair treatment in administrative decisions. The constitutional right to judicial review is broader than specific statutory provisions and cannot be excluded by the failure of statute to expressly provide for it.
Judicial Review — Scope — Quasi-Judicial Bodies
University Staff Tribunals established under statute are administrative bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions and are therefore susceptible to judicial review. Such tribunals cannot claim judicial immunity as a defence to judicial review proceedings, as judicial review exists precisely to check the exercise of powers by administrative entities and ensure compliance with principles of legality and fairness.
Time Limits — Mandatory Nature — Statutory Appeals
Statutory time limits are matters of substantive law and not mere technicalities. They must be strictly complied with and are mandatory. Courts cannot enlarge statutory time limits unless expressly empowered by law, and judicial discretion cannot override clear statutory provisions. Allowing an appeal outside a statutory time limit undermines certainty, fairness, and the rule of law.
University Staff Appeals — Statutory Time Limits — Jurisdiction
Under Section 57(1) of the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act, a member of staff must appeal to the University Staff Tribunal within 14 days after being notified of an Appointments Board decision. A tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal filed outside this mandatory 14-day period. Similarly, under Section 57(2), the Tribunal must render its decision within 45 days, and a decision rendered outside this period is illegal.
Judicial Review — Purpose and Scope — Fair Treatment
Judicial review is concerned with the process through which a decision is arrived at, not with the correctness of the decision itself. It is intended to check excesses in the exercise of judicial power and to ensure that individuals appearing before administrative entities are treated fairly. Judicial review should not be used to challenge the legal correctness of a decision made following proper procedure and within lawful authority.

Legislation cited (19)

Cases cited (14)

  • Babcon Uganda Ltd v Mbale Resort Hotel Ltd
  • Makerere University v Makerere University Staff Tribunal and Two Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 117 of 2024)
  • Byaruhanga John Patrick v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Application No. 235 of 2024)
  • Pastoli v Kabale District Government Council and Others [2008] 2 EA 300
  • Makerere University v Makerere University Staff Tribunal and Dr. Malowa Davis Ndanyi (Miscellaneous Cause No. 285 of 2023)
  • Haj Kaala Ibrahim v Attorney General and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 23 of 2017)
  • DOTT Services Ltd v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 125 of 2009)
  • Eng. Liiki Samuel v Secretary Public Service Commission and Others (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 168 of 2025)
  • Chief Constable of North Wales Police v Heavens (1982) 3 All ER 108
  • Uganda Association of Consulting Engineers v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 182 of 2024)
  • Francis Ninyenda v Makerere University (Miscellaneous Cause No. 413 of 2017)
  • Uganda Revenue Authority v Uganda Consolidated Properties Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2000)
  • Makula International v Cardinal Nsubuga [1982] HCB 11
  • Ayena Odongo v Attorney General (Constitutional Court Petition No. 38 of 2017)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makerere University v Makerere University Staff Tribunal and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 164 of 2024) [2026] UGHCCD 80 (25 February 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.