Wakilii

Nattabi Margaret v Levi Tshilumba and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 72 of 2023)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 30 · 2026 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review of disqualification from university guild presidential elections
Decision
Application partly allowed — disqualification declared unlawful but election outcome not quashed as overtaken by events; applicant awarded damages and costs

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 the disqualification of a university guild presidential candidate without affording her a hearing violated natural justice principles. The decision was amenable to judicial review as it involved a public body exercising administrative functions. Although the candidate had been disqualified for participating in an unauthorised physical electoral debate contrary to university regulations requiring virtual elections, the Electoral Commission failed to give her an opportunity to present her defence before disqualification. The court found the decision tainted with illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety, and awarded general damages for the unfair treatment.

Outcome

Application partly allowed — disqualification declared unlawful but election outcome not quashed as overtaken by events; applicant awarded damages and costs

Facts

Nattabi Margaret was nominated as a candidate for the 89th Makerere University Guild presidential elections on 31 March 2023. On 4 April 2023, she was invited by Mitchell Hall Students Common Room to participate in a panel discussion on 5 April 2023 regarding hall infrastructure renovation. She attended and addressed students between 8:00pm and 9:00pm. Following a fight that erupted at the event resulting in a student being injured, the Electoral Commission disqualified Nattabi on 6 April 2023 via a letter circulated on social media, citing violation of regulations requiring virtual elections. The disqualification letter was never personally served on her. She learned of her disqualification through social media. The Guild Tribunal declined jurisdiction over her complaint, directing her to the Guild Election Petition Tribunal which only has jurisdiction post-election. The elections proceeded on 14 April 2023 without her participation.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is amenable to judicial review.
  2. Whether the applicant was granted a fair hearing prior to being disqualified.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The respondents' decision to disqualify the applicant from the guild presidential elections was tainted with illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety.
  • The impugned decision violated the rules and principles of natural justice.
  • General damages of UGX 2,000,000/= awarded to the applicant.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Amenability — Public Bodies — University Electoral Commissions
A university electoral commission exercising administrative functions on behalf of a public university is a public body whose decisions are amenable to judicial review under Article 42 of the Constitution and section 36 of the Judicature Act.
Judicial Review — Exhaustion of Remedies — Availability of Alternative Remedies
An applicant cannot be penalised for failing to exhaust internal remedies where the available internal tribunal lacks jurisdiction over pre-election complaints and no clear statutory provision establishes an alternative appellate route.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Right to a Fair Hearing — Disciplinary Proceedings
An administrative body exercising disciplinary or quasi-judicial functions must afford a person an opportunity to be heard before making a decision that adversely affects their rights, regardless of whether the breach of regulations appears clear.
Administrative Law — Grounds for Judicial Review — Procedural Impropriety
Where an electoral commission disqualifies a candidate without giving her notice of the allegations, an opportunity to respond, or evidence that she was summoned to a hearing, the decision is tainted with procedural impropriety and violates natural justice.
Administrative Law — Remedies — Damages for Procedural Unfairness
Where an applicant has been unlawfully disqualified from an election but the election has already been held and concluded, the court may decline to quash the election outcome as impractical but may award general damages for the inconvenience and unfair treatment suffered.

Legislation cited (16)

Cases cited (2)

  • Ssenyimba Vincent and 2 Others v Birikade Peter and Another (HCMA No. 378 of 2018)
  • Chief Constable of North Wales Police v Evans [1983] 3 All ER 143

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nattabi Margaret v Levi Tshilumba and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 72 of 2023) [2026] UGHCCD 30 (6 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.