Wakilii

SGS Societe Generale De Surveilance SA v Public Procurement & Disposal Of Public Assets Authority & Anor. (Misc Application No. 43 of 2011)

High Court · [2012] UGHC 112 · 2012 Judicial Review Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review challenging findings of unethical conduct in procurement process
Decision
Orders of certiorari, prohibition, and injunction granted in favour of applicant

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 Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority violated principles of natural justice by finding the applicant guilty of unethical conduct based on newspaper allegations without affording the applicant an opportunity to be heard. The court quashed the decision as procedurally improper and granted an order of prohibition restraining disciplinary action based on the flawed report.

Outcome

Orders of certiorari, prohibition, and injunction granted in favour of applicant

Facts

The Ministry of Works and Transport initiated a tender process for motor vehicle inspection services in 2008. SGS Societe Generale de Surveillance SA participated and was ultimately named the best evaluated bidder in September 2010. A competing bidder, ESP, filed an administrative review with PPDA challenging the award. During the administrative review hearing on 1 November 2010, PPDA discovered and relied upon newspaper allegations published that same day claiming that SGS had improperly influenced the procurement process through email communications with a ministry official. Without notifying SGS or giving it an opportunity to respond to these allegations, PPDA issued a report rejecting ESP's complaint but also finding that SGS had engaged in unethical conduct and recommending cancellation of the entire procurement process. SGS was threatened with disciplinary action and blacklisting. SGS then applied for judicial review, arguing it had been condemned unheard.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondent conducted the administrative appeal in accordance with principles of natural justice and the law
  2. Whether the applicant is entitled to the remedies against the 1st and 2nd respondent

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Order of certiorari granted quashing the decision of the 1st respondent regarding unethical conduct by the applicant.
  • Order of prohibition granted restraining the Ministry of Works and Transport from taking disciplinary action against the applicant based on the 1st respondent's report.
  • Injunction granted stopping re-tendering for provision of mandatory motor vehicle inspection by Ministry of Works and Transport.
  • Costs awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Audi Alteram Partem — Right to be Heard Before Adverse Decision
Where an administrative authority makes a finding that adversely affects a party's rights or reputation, principles of natural justice require that the party be given notice of the case against them and an opportunity to be heard before the decision is made, regardless of whether the final decision would have been the same.
Judicial Review — Grounds — Procedural Impropriety — Failure to Observe Natural Justice
To succeed in an application for judicial review, an applicant must show that the decision is tainted with illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety, including failure to act fairly and observe the rules of natural justice.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Statutory Hearing Requirements
Section 91(3) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 and Regulation 347(4) of the PPDA Regulations require that a hearing be conducted before PPDA makes its decision in an administrative review, and failure to comply with this statutory requirement renders the decision liable to be quashed.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Condemned Unheard — Effect on Decision
Where principles of natural justice are violated in respect of any decision, it is immaterial whether the same decision would have been arrived at in the absence of the procedural departure; the decision must be declared to be no decision.
Judicial Review — Remedies — Certiorari and Prohibition — Grounds for Grant
Where an administrative authority violates principles of natural justice by making adverse findings without affording the affected party a hearing, the court will grant certiorari to quash the decision and prohibition to restrain further action based on that flawed decision.

Legislation cited (12)

Cases cited (5)

  • Twinomugisha Pastori v Kabale District Local Government Council and Others (2006)
  • Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374
  • Rose Nalwadda v Uganda Aids Commission (Misc Cause No. 45 of 2010)
  • General Medical Council v Spackman [1943] AC 627
  • Misc. Application No. 36 of 2011 against the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

SGS Societe Generale De Surveilance SA v Public Procurement & Disposal Of Public Assets Authority & Anor. (Misc Application No. 43 of 2011) [2012] UGHC 112 (22 June 2012)
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.