Minet Uganda Insurance Brokers Limited v Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited [2026] UGPPDPAAT 5
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 struck out the application on the ground that it was incompetent. The Respondent's Accounting Officer failed to render a decision on the Applicant's administrative review complaint within the statutory period of ten calendar days prescribed under section 106(7) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act. The decision communicated on 19 January 2026 was outside the ten-day period which expired on 17 January 2026, rendering it null and void. The Tribunal held that statutory time limits are matters of substantive law requiring strict compliance, and that Saturdays are not excluded days unless they fall on a public holiday.
Outcome
Application struck out for incompetence due to late decision by Accounting Officer on administrative review complaint
Facts
Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited initiated a procurement process for insurance brokerage services for Financial Years 2025-2026 on 18 September 2025 using Open Domestic Bidding. Six bidders submitted bids on 22 October 2025. On 23 December 2025, UETCL issued a Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder declaring Clarkson Insurance Brokers Ltd as the best evaluated bidder. Minet Uganda Insurance Brokers Limited's bid was unsuccessful at the financial comparison stage because its average turnover of UGX 9,699,889,667 was lower than Clarkson's UGX 12,128,983,380. Minet lodged an administrative review complaint with UETCL's Accounting Officer on 7 January 2026. UETCL responded on 19 January 2026, dismissing the complaint. Minet filed a Notice of Intention to file an application to the Tribunal on 28 January 2026 and filed the application on 30 January 2026, challenging the evaluation methodology, the use of average annual turnover as the decisive criterion, and the classification of insurance brokerage services as non-consultancy services.
Issues
- Whether the application before the Tribunal is competent?
- Whether the determination of the Best Evaluated Bidder based on the highest average annual turnover was consistent with the approved evaluation methodology and the PPDA legal framework?
- Whether the use of average annual turnover as a decisive ranking factor was lawful, proportionate, and consistent with procurement principles?
- Whether the classification of insurance brokerage services as non-consultancy services and the application of the Technical Compliance Selection (TCS) method were legally proper?
- Whether there are available remedies to the Parties?
Orders
- The Application is struck out.
- The Tribunal's suspension order dated February 2, 2026 is vacated.
- Each Party to bear its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.76
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.106(7)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.106(8)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.106(9)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act s.115(2)
- Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (Procurement of Consultancy Services) Regulations, S.I. No. 101 of 2023
- Interpretation Act s.34(1)(b)
Cases cited (3)
- Xinjiang and Beijing Shine Technology Consortium v Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited (Application No. 37 of 2025)
- Super Taste Limited v Bank of Uganda (Application No. 33 of 2021)
- Uganda Revenue Authority v
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.