Wakilii

Mbarara City Truck Owners Drivers and Loaders Cooperative Limited v Mbarara City Council [2024] UGPPDPAAT 43

Tribunal · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of procurement decision following dismissal of administrative review by Accounting Officer
Decision
Award set aside and matter remitted to Respondent for re-evaluation of bids within 10 working days; administrative review fees to be 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 the procuring entity erred in eliminating the applicant's bid based on a misinterpretation of the bid securing declaration validity period. The applicant's declaration, though not explicitly stating 120 days validity, impliedly accepted all bidding requirements and the one-day deviation should have been waived as immaterial. The Tribunal further found that the evaluation committee failed to assess whether bidders were defaulters or non-performers as required by the technical evaluation criteria. The award was set aside and the matter remitted for re-evaluation.

Outcome

Award set aside and matter remitted to Respondent for re-evaluation of bids within 10 working days; administrative review fees to be refunded to Applicant

Facts

Mbarara City Council initiated procurement for collection of revenue from lorry parking fees using open bidding. Two bids were received on August 6, 2024. Following evaluation, the contract was awarded to Ankole United Truck Owners and Drivers Cooperative Society Limited at UGX 12,000,000 per month. The Best Evaluated Bidder Notice displayed on September 27, 2024 indicated the Applicant's bid was unsuccessful because it submitted a bid securing declaration which expired on August 6, 2024, before the required 120 working days ending January 27, 2025. The Applicant sought administrative review on October 4, 2024, which was dismissed on October 11, 2024. The Applicant then filed this application with the Tribunal on October 15, 2024.

Issues

  1. Whether the Respondent erred when it eliminated the Applicant's bid on the ground that the bid securing declaration was non-responsive to the requirement of the bidding document.
  2. Whether Ankole United Truck Owners and Drivers Cooperative Society Limited was rightfully declared as the best evaluated bidder.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Award of contract to Ankole United Truck Owners and Drivers Cooperative Society Limited set aside.
  • Best Evaluated Bidder Notice dated September 27, 2024 set aside.
  • Respondent ordered to re-evaluate bids within 10 working days in a manner consistent with the decision, bidding document, and law.
  • Respondent to refund Applicant's administrative review fees.
  • Tribunal's suspension order dated October 15, 2024 vacated.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Public Procurement — Bid Securing Declaration — Validity Period — Purposive Interpretation
A bid securing declaration that does not explicitly state the validity period but reproduces the entire bidding document and declares acceptance of all conditions impliedly accepts the prescribed validity period, and a one-day deviation in the commencement date constitutes an immaterial non-conformity that should be waived under regulation 7 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (Evaluation) Regulations, 2023.
Public Procurement — Bidding Documents — Interpretation of Form Requirements
Where a bidding document prescribes a form requiring insertion of a date 'in accordance with the preparation of proposals', a purposive interpretation requires insertion of the bid validity period prescribed under the 'Preparation of Proposals' section, not the date of bid preparation.
Public Procurement — Technical Evaluation — Mandatory Criteria — Defaulters and Non-Performers
Where bidding documents specify that defaulters and non-performers should not apply, the evaluation committee must make a positive determination on this criterion during technical evaluation, and failure to do so renders the evaluation deficient and the award of contract erroneous.
Public Procurement — Bid Securing Declaration — Non-Conformity with Prescribed Form
Non-conformity with the specific form of a bid securing declaration does not render the bid void where the bidder has substantially complied with the requirements and accepted to be bound by all conditions relating to the declaration.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (2)

  • Kasokosoko Services Ltd v Jinja School of Nursing and Midwifery (PPDA Appeals Tribunal Application No. 13 of 2021)
  • Orungo Market Vendors Association v Amuria District Local Government (PPDA Appeals Tribunal Application No. 41 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mbarara City Truck Owners Drivers and Loaders Cooperative Limited v Mbarara City Council 2024 UGPPDPAAT 43 (4 November 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.