Wakilii

Permanent Secretary Ministry of Local Government v Thugitho Festo (Miscellaneous Application No. 37 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 224 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of orders in Miscellaneous Application No. 0062 of 2022, arising from contempt proceedings related to judicial review orders in Miscellaneous Cause No. 0015 of 2017
Decision
Orders against the Applicant in the underlying contempt proceedings set aside; application for review granted

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 Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Local Government was irregularly sued in contempt proceedings because civil proceedings by or against the Government must be instituted by or against the Attorney General. The court set aside orders made against the Applicant in Miscellaneous Application No. 0062 of 2019, finding that the Respondent failed to properly serve the Attorney General and that the Applicant was condemned unheard in violation of natural justice.

Outcome

Orders against the Applicant in the underlying contempt proceedings set aside; application for review granted

Facts

The Respondent obtained judicial review orders in 2017 directing Nebbi Municipal Council to reinstate him as Town Clerk. When the Council allegedly failed to comply, the Respondent filed contempt proceedings in 2019 against both the Council and the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Local Government. That application was dismissed for want of prosecution in 2022, then reinstated by court order with costs awarded against both respondents. The Permanent Secretary learned of the reinstatement order only when served with a bill of costs in 2024 and applied for review, arguing it was never properly served with the underlying applications and should not have been sued as a party in the first place.

Issues

  1. Whether the application was incompetent for being brought under the wrong law.
  2. Whether the affidavit in support of the application was defective and thus liable to be struck out.
  3. Whether the Applicant was an aggrieved person within the meaning of Section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 and Order 46 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  4. Whether the Applicant should have been sued in Miscellaneous Application No. 0062 of 2019.
  5. Whether there was proper service of Miscellaneous Application No. 0062 of 2022 and Miscellaneous Cause No. 0062 of 2019 on the Applicant.
  6. Whether there were sufficient grounds to grant the application for review.

Orders

  • Application for review allowed.
  • Orders in Miscellaneous Application No. 0062 of 2019 as against the Applicant set aside.
  • Each party to bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Nature and Requirements
A preliminary objection raises a pure point of law argued on the assumption that all facts pleaded by the other side are correct. It cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained or if what is sought is the exercise of judicial discretion. The object of the rule is expedition, and the point of law must be one which can be decided fairly and squarely on facts agreed or not in issue on the pleadings.
Civil Procedure — Applications — Citation of Wrong Law
Where an application omits to cite any law at all or cites the wrong law but the jurisdiction to grant the order exists, the irregularity or omission can be ignored and the correct law inserted. The citing of wrong law is not fatal to an application and does not prejudice the application where the court has jurisdiction.
Administrative Law — Government Proceedings — Proper Party to Sue or Be Sued
Civil proceedings by or against the Government must be instituted by or against the Attorney General, who is the principal legal adviser and representative of the Government. A Permanent Secretary of a Government Ministry cannot be sued in his individual capacity, and the Ministry itself is not a body corporate that can sue or be sued. All documents required to be served on the Government must be served on the Attorney General.
Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Consequences of Non-Service
Where there is no affidavit of service proving that an application was properly served on a party as required by law, the application ought to be dismissed. The Constitution and rules of natural justice guarantee the right to a fair hearing, and a party cannot be condemned unheard without proper service of process.
Administrative Law — Local Government — Distinction Between Local Government Bodies and Government Ministries
Local governments are bodies corporate under the Local Government Act and can sue and be sued in their corporate names. However, a Ministry of the Government of Uganda is not a body corporate and cannot sue or be sued independently. Proceedings involving a Government Ministry must be instituted by or against the Attorney General.

Legislation cited (18)

Cases cited (8)

  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd (1969) EA 697
  • NAS Airport Services Ltd v Attorney General of Kenya [1959] EA 53
  • Gunya Company Ltd v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No. 31 of 2011)
  • Saggu v Roadmaster Cycles (U) Ltd [2002] 1 EA 262
  • Nanjibhi Prabhudas and Company Ltd v Standard Bank Ltd [1968] EA
  • Re Christine Namatovu Tebajjukira [1992-93] HCB 85
  • Lena Nakalema Binaisa & 3 Ors v Mucunguzi Myers (Miscellaneous Application No. 469 of 2013)
  • Bankone Ltd v Simbamanyo Estates Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 645 of 2020)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Permanent Secretary Ministry of Local Government v Thugitho Festo (Miscellaneous Application No. 37 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 224 (18 March 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.