National Drug Authority & Anor v Nakachwa (Civil Appeal No. 281 & 286 of 2017)
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 Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals, holding that although termination of employment is ordinarily a private-law matter, this case mixed private and public law because the respondent challenged the legality of the statutory body's actions. The National Drug Authority, as a creature of statute, had no power to create an office of Executive Director and assign it the statutory duties of the Secretary defined under section 54 of the National Drug Policy and Authority Act; doing so was an illegality, not a mere matter of form. Because the respondent's termination flowed from decisions made under this unlawful structure, and because the appointment could be challenged by anyone as a public-interest matter, the trial judge correctly entertained the judicial review and granted relief.
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs; High Court ruling and orders upheld
Facts
In April 2015 the National Drug Authority advertised the position of Executive Director. The second appellant was appointed to that role and the respondent was appointed Head of Drug Assessment and Registration on a fixed-term contract. The statute establishing the Authority (section 54 of the National Drug Policy and Authority Act) created a Secretariat headed by a Secretary, not an Executive Director. After legal concerns arose, the Solicitor General advised amending the second appellant's title to Secretary. In March 2017 the Authority adopted a new Macro Organisation Structure and directed staff on contract to reapply for their positions. The respondent's contract was terminated through a directive communicated by the second appellant. The respondent brought judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of the second appellant's appointment, the new organisational structure and the termination of her employment. The High Court granted her some of the orders sought, and the appellants appealed.
Issues
- Whether the respondent's employment dispute was a proper case for judicial review given the availability of alternative remedies under employment law.
- Whether the second appellant was clothed with lawful authority to terminate the respondent's contract.
- Whether the National Drug Authority acted lawfully in recruiting an Executive Director and assigning that person the duties of the statutory Secretary to the Authority.
Orders
- Appeals rejected.
- Ground 13 struck out for failing to comply with Rule 66 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- Appeals dismissed with costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
Cases cited (15)
- R v Berkshire Health Authority [1984] 3 All ER 425
- Republic v Professor Mwangi S. Kimenyi & Others Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No.160 of 2008 (unreported)
- Classy Photo Mart Ltd v Commissioner of Uganda Revenue Authority [2010] UGCommC 2
- Catherine Amal v Equal Opportunities Commission [2016] UGHCCD 123
- Uganda Taxi Operators and Drivers Association v Kampala Capital City Authority [2012] UGHC 14
- Uganda Revenue Authority v Rabbo Enterprises (U) Ltd [2017] UGSC 20
- Uganda Broadcasting Corporation v Ruthura Agaba Kamukama [2015] UGHCCD 121
- Stanbic Bank Ltd v Kiyemba Mutale [2011] UGSC 18
- National Drug Authority v Frank Mwesigye (Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2012)
- Kenya National Examination Council v Republic Ex Parte Geoffrey Gathenji Njoroge & 9 others [1997] eKLR
- R v Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte Avon County Council [1991] 1 All ER 282
- R v British Broadcasting Corporation, ex parte Lavelle [1983] 1 All ER 241
- Chief Constable of North Wales Police v Evans [1982] 1 WLR 1155
- Commissioner of LANDS - V- KUNSTE HOTEL LIMITED 1995-1998 1 E.A. 1 (CAK)
- ERIC MAKOKHA & OTHERS - V- LAWRENCE SAGINI & OTHERS CA No. 20 of 1994 at NRB
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.