Wakilii

Prof. Mugisha v Makerere University Council & Anor (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO. 312 of 2018)

High Court · [2019] UGHCCD 118 · 2019 Application Granted — Appointment Quashed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review seeking orders of certiorari and mandamus to quash appointment of 2nd Respondent as Deputy Vice-Chancellor and to direct lawful reappointment process
Decision
Appointment of 2nd Respondent quashed; 1st Respondent directed to recommence lawful appointment process

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 appointment of the 2nd Respondent as Deputy Vice-Chancellor was unlawful because the Search Committee exceeded its mandate by forwarding only one candidate to Senate, thereby fettering Senate's statutory discretion under the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act to make the recommendation itself. The Court granted certiorari quashing the appointment and mandamus directing lawful recommencement of the appointment process.

Outcome

Appointment of 2nd Respondent quashed; 1st Respondent directed to recommence lawful appointment process

Facts

The Applicant, a Professor at Makerere University, applied for the position of Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Finance and Administration). The University Senate established a Search Committee with terms of reference to identify and propose a maximum of five suitable candidates to Senate. Five applications were received; two candidates (the Applicant and 2nd Respondent) met the shortlisting criteria and were interviewed. The Search Committee set a pass mark of 60%. The 2nd Respondent scored 86.42% while the Applicant scored 58.19%, below the pass mark. The Search Committee forwarded only the 2nd Respondent's name to Senate as the sole suitable candidate. Senate adopted the report and forwarded it to University Council, which approved it for submission to the Chancellor. The Chancellor appointed the 2nd Respondent. The Applicant challenged this process by judicial review, arguing the Search Committee exceeded its mandate and acted with bias by forwarding only one candidate, thereby denying Senate the opportunity to exercise its statutory discretion.

Issues

  1. Whether the process leading to the selection of the 2nd Respondent as Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Finance and Administration) was lawful.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • An Order of Certiorari is issued quashing the appointment of the 2nd Respondent Prof. William Bazeyo as the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Finance and Administration) of the 1st Respondent.
  • An Order of Mandamus is issued directing the 1st Respondent, its agents or persons acting on its behalf, to comply with the statutory duty under the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act and cause the proper appointment of Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Finance and Administration).
  • The applicant is granted costs of the application.
  • No damages are awarded.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Fettering of Discretion — Public Authority Abdicating Statutory Functions
Where a statute vests a public authority with discretionary power to make a decision, that authority abdicates its functions and fetters its discretion unlawfully if it mechanically endorses the recommendation of a subordinate body without exercising its own independent judgment as intended by the statute.
University Appointments — Statutory Appointment Process — Role of Senate
Under the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act section 32, the University Senate is vested with the statutory function to recommend candidates for appointment as Deputy Vice-Chancellor. A Search Committee established by Senate to assist in identifying suitable candidates must not usurp Senate's discretion by forwarding only one candidate, thereby reducing Senate to a rubber-stamp.
Judicial Review — Terms of Reference — Ultra Vires Acts
Where a delegated body's terms of reference require it to propose a maximum of five suitable candidates to enable the parent authority to exercise discretion in choosing among them, the delegated body acts ultra vires if it forwards only one candidate without justification based on lack of suitable applicants, thereby foreclosing the parent authority's statutory choice.
Judicial Review — Certiorari — Effect of Quashing Order
The effect of an order of certiorari is to restore the status quo ante, returning the situation to what existed before the unlawful decision was made.
Judicial Review — Mandamus — Requirements for Issuance
An applicant for an order of mandamus must establish: (a) a clear legal right and corresponding duty on the respondent; (b) that a specific act which the law requires that officer to do has been omitted; (c) lack of an alternative remedy, or that any alternative is inconvenient, less beneficial or ineffective.
Judicial Review — Damages — Availability and Scope
Damages are not automatically awarded in judicial review proceedings. An individual seeking compensation against a public body must establish that the unlawful action also constitutes a recognizable tort (such as misfeasance in public office) or involves a breach of contract. Judicial review is primarily concerned with correcting public wrongs, not recovering damages.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (8)

  • John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 353 of 2005)
  • DOTT Services Ltd v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 125 of 2009)
  • Balondemu David v The Law Development Centre (Miscellaneous Cause No. 61 of 2016)
  • Commissioner of Land v Kunste Hotel Ltd [1995-1998] 1 EA (CAK)
  • Mathipa v Vista University 2000(1)SA 396
  • R vs Aston University Senate ex p Roffey [1969] 2 QB 558
  • R vs Secretary of State for Health ex p Furneaux [1994] 2 All ER 652
  • Hon Justice Geoffrey Kiryabwire & Others v Attorney General (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 783 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Prof. Mugisha Vs Makerere University Council & Anor (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO. 312 of 2018) [2019] UGHCCD 118 (14 June 2019)
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.