Wakilii

Subamu Investment Limited v Iganga Municipal Council [2025] UGPPDPAAT 39

Tribunal · 2025 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of procurement decision before the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal
Decision
Best Evaluated Bidder Notices set aside and matter remitted to Accounting Officer for investigation and decision within ten days

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

Held that a bidder who purchased bidding documents but failed to submit a bid on time has locus standi as a person intending to participate in procurement proceedings. The Accounting Officer breached statutory duties by failing to suspend the procurement process upon receipt of an administrative review complaint and by failing to investigate and communicate a decision within ten days. The Best Evaluated Bidder Notices were set aside and the matter remitted to the Accounting Officer for proper investigation and decision.

Outcome

Best Evaluated Bidder Notices set aside and matter remitted to Accounting Officer for investigation and decision within ten days

Facts

Iganga Municipal Council initiated procurement for revenue collection management using open domestic bidding. The bid submission deadline was July 25, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. Only one bid from Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd was received on time. The Applicant alleged it was prevented from submitting its bid by the director of Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd and filed an administrative review complaint on July 29, 2025. On August 4, 2025, the Respondent issued Best Evaluated Bidder Notices declaring Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd the successful bidder for both revenue collection contracts. The Accounting Officer did not suspend the procurement process upon receipt of the complaint and did not make or communicate a decision on the complaint within the statutory ten-day period.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has locus standi before the Tribunal?
  2. Whether the Respondent's Accounting Officer erred when she omitted to suspend the procurement process upon receipt of the Applicant's complaint?
  3. Whether the Respondent's Accounting Officer erred when she omitted to make and communicate a decision on the Applicant's complaint?
  4. Whether Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd prevented the Applicant from submitting its bid on time?
  5. Whether Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd was qualified for the award of contract?
  6. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Application allowed in part.
  • Best Evaluated Bidder Notice dated August 4, 2025, declaring Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd. the best evaluated bidder for revenue collection from loading and offloading lorries and trucks set aside.
  • Best Evaluated Bidder Notice dated August 4, 2025, declaring Manyanja Technical Co. Ltd. the best evaluated bidder for revenue collection from street parking set aside.
  • Respondent's Accounting Officer directed to investigate and communicate a decision on the Applicant's complaint within ten days from the date of this decision.
  • Tribunal's suspension order dated August 15, 2025, vacated.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Locus Standi — Definition of Bidder
A person who purchases bidding documents and intends to participate in procurement proceedings qualifies as a bidder within the meaning of section 2 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205, even if they fail to submit a bid on time, and therefore has locus standi to apply to the Tribunal for review.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Mandatory Suspension of Procurement Process
When an administrative review complaint has been filed, the Accounting Officer must immediately suspend the procurement process and request bidders to extend the period of bid validity and bid security for the duration of the suspension, as required by sections 106(5) and 106(6) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205 and regulation 5 of the Administrative Review Regulations 2023.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Duty to Investigate and Decide
It is the Accounting Officer's statutory duty to investigate an administrative review complaint and make and communicate a written decision within ten days of receiving the complaint, stating reasons and corrective measures if any, as required by sections 28(1)(j) and 106(7) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205 and regulation 8 of the Administrative Review Regulations 2023.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Time Limits for Application to Tribunal
Where an Accounting Officer does not make or communicate a decision within the prescribed ten-day period, an aggrieved bidder may apply to the Tribunal within ten days from the date of expiry of that period, as provided by sections 106(8) and 115(2)(c) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Illegality of Procurement Actions During Suspension Period
Where an Accounting Officer breaches the statutory duty to suspend the procurement process upon receipt of an administrative review complaint, any subsequent evaluation of bids, award of contract, and issuance of Best Evaluated Bidder Notices is illegal.

Legislation cited (11)

Cases cited (1)

  • Njau & Others v City Council of Nairobi [1976-1985] 1 EA 397

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Subamu Investment Limited v Iganga Municipal Council 2025 UGPPDPAAT 39 (2 September 2025)
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.