Muyingo & Anor v The Administrator General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 01 of 2016)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

The court granted mandamus compelling the Administrator General to issue a certificate of no objection. The Administrator General has a statutory duty under section 5 of the Administrator General's Act to issue certificates of no objection to intending applicants for grants if not administering the estate himself. The applicants, who were unanimously nominated by the deceased's family and were connected to the deceased by consanguinity, were entitled under section 201 of the Succession Act to administer the estate. The respondent adduced no evidence justifying refusal.

Outcome

Order of mandamus granted compelling Administrator General to issue certificate of no objection to the applicants

Facts

Amulani Kewaza died intestate in 1959 leaving several properties including land. He had distributed some properties to beneficiaries by way of certificates of succession before his death, but other properties remained undistributed. The certificates of succession became useless when the law under which they were issued was repealed, and the distributed properties were never transferred. Fraudsters began forging documents to claim ownership and the estate started going to waste. In 2013, the applicants, unanimously nominated by a family meeting of beneficiaries to administer the estate, applied for a certificate of no objection from the Administrator General. The Administrator General requested and received confirmation of the family's nomination through the Mpigi District Chief Administrative Officer and family meeting minutes dated September 2014. Despite family meetings held at the respondent's office and an indication in April 2015 that clarifications were being sought, the Administrator General failed to issue the certificate.

Issues

1. Whether the Administrator General's refusal to issue a certificate of no objection to the applicants was irrational, unreasonable or in bad faith.
2. Whether an order of mandamus should issue to compel the Administrator General to issue the certificate of no objection.

Orders

• An order of mandamus does issue against the respondent ordering him to issue a certificate of no objection to the applicants.
• Costs of the application be paid by the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (10)

• Judicature Act cap 13 s.36
• Judicature Act cap 13 s.37
• Judicature Act cap 13 s.38
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.3
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.6
• Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules SI No. 11 of 2009 r.7
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 9 r.20(1)(a)
• Administrator General's Act s.5
• Succession Act s.201
• Succession Act s.278

Cases cited (5)

• Yoswa Kityo v Eria Kaddu [1982] HCB 58
• Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374
• Aggrey Bwire v The Attorney General & Anor (Civil Application No. 160 of 2008)
• John Jet Mwebaze v Makerere University (Civil Application No. 353 of 2005)
• Massa v Achen [1978] HCB 279

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Eddie Kwizera Wa-Gahungu v Attorney General and 2 Others (Constitutional Petition No. 2 of 2019)

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