Wakilii

Passionate Ventures SMS Uganda Limited v Bulambuli District Local Government (Application 35 of 2023)

Tribunal · [2024] UGPPDPAAT 1 · 2024 Application Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of procurement decision to reject all bids and re-advertise tender
Decision
Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction

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 for lack of jurisdiction. Where a procuring entity rejects all bids prior to contract award in accordance with section 75(3) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act, section 91I(3)(a) bars the Tribunal from reviewing the reasons for rejection. The Tribunal may only inquire whether the rejection was validly effected in accordance with the Act. Having determined that the rejection complied with statutory requirements, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to examine the merits of the rejection decision.

Outcome

Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction

Facts

Bulambuli District Local Government tendered for construction works under procurement reference BULA 820/WRKS/2023-24/00001. Three bidders submitted bids on 25 September 2023. The Evaluation Committee recommended rejection of all bids as non-compliant and non-responsive, and re-advertisement of the tender. The Contracts Committee approved this recommendation on 4 December 2023. The Best Evaluated Bidder Notice stated that Passionate Ventures SMC Uganda Limited's bid was unsuccessful because no income tax clearance certificate was attached. The Applicant filed an administrative review complaint on 7 December 2023, alleging it had included a tax clearance certificate dated 18 September 2023. The Applicant then filed this application with the Tribunal on 22 December 2023, alleging the Accounting Officer failed to decide the administrative review complaint.

Issues

  1. Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the Application?
  2. Whether the Respondent's Accounting Officer erred when he did not make an administrative review decision on the Applicant's complaint?
  3. Whether the Respondent erred in law and fact when it rejected the bid of the Applicant?

Orders

  • Application struck out.
  • Tribunal's suspension order dated 27th December 2023 vacated.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Tribunal Jurisdiction — Statutory Ouster Clauses — Review of Procurement Decisions
Section 91I(3)(a) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act ousts the jurisdiction of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal to review a decision by a procuring entity to reject any or all bids prior to award of contract under section 75.
Administrative Law — Tribunal Jurisdiction — Preliminary Inquiry into Validity of Rejection
Although the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review the reasons for rejection of bids prior to contract award, it has jurisdiction to inquire into the decision-making process leading to the rejection to determine whether there is a valid rejection within the meaning of section 75(3) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act.
Administrative Law — Procurement — Rejection of All Bids — Statutory Compliance
Where an Evaluation Committee recommends rejection of all bids as non-compliant and non-responsive, and the Contracts Committee approves that recommendation prior to contract award, the rejection is effected in accordance with sections 75(3) and 91I(3)(a) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act, and the Tribunal is barred from reviewing the reasons for rejection.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (1)

  • Globe Engineering Uganda Limited v Jinja City (Application No. 20 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Passionate Ventures SMS Uganda Limited v Bulambuli District Local Government (Application 35 of 2023) 2024 UGPPDPAAT 1 (10 January 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.