Wakilii

Tijas Investment Limited v Lira City Council (Application 5 of 2024)

Tribunal · [2024] UGPPDPAAT 6 · 2024 Application Dismissed 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
Application struck out for lack of locus standi

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 held that the applicant lacked locus standi to bring the application because its bid validity expired on 6 December 2023 without extension, and it ceased to be a bidder before filing the application on 17 January 2024. A bidder whose bid validity has expired without a request for extension from the procuring entity cannot maintain an application before the Tribunal under the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act. The application was struck out.

Outcome

Application struck out for lack of locus standi

Facts

Lira City Council initiated a tender for construction of a two-classroom block with an office at Anai Primary School under procurement reference LIRA606/WRKS/23-24/00002. Three bidders submitted bids on 7 August 2023. On 21 September 2023, Tijos Investment Ltd was declared the best evaluated bidder with a contract price of UGX 90,207,696. On 26 September 2023, Olet Magezi Lira Hardware Company Ltd filed an administrative review complaint. The Accounting Officer constituted an administrative review committee which recommended on 16 October 2023 that the contract be awarded to Olet Magezi Lira Hardware Company Ltd. On 14 November 2023, the Accounting Officer cancelled the procurement process. The bid validity period was stated as 6 December 2023. The Respondent did not request extension of bid validity. Tijos Investment Ltd filed this application on 17 January 2024.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has locus standi before the Tribunal?
  2. Whether the Respondent's Accounting Officer erred in law and fact when he cancelled the procurement process?
  3. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The Application is struck out.
  • The Tribunal's suspension order dated January 17, 2024, is vacated.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Locus Standi — Bid Validity Period — Effect of Expiry
Once a bid's validity period has expired without a request for extension from the procuring and disposing entity, the affected bidder's participation in the impugned procurement process comes to an end and the bidder ceases to have locus standi to bring an application before the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Locus Standi — Bidder Status — Distinction from Person Adversely Affected
A bidder who participated in an impugned procurement process cannot change to a 'person whose rights are adversely affected by the decision of the Accounting Officer' for purposes of obtaining locus standi before the Tribunal under section 91I(1)(b) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act. The bidder must be construed as a bidder for purposes of the application.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Jurisdiction — Locus Standi as Precondition
In the absence of locus standi by an applicant, the Tribunal cannot exercise its jurisdiction over the application. The competence of an application is premised on the determination of whether the applicant has locus to file the application before the Tribunal.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (20)

  • Pynet Technologies SMC Ltd v Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (Applications 1 & 2 of 2024)
  • Passionate Ventures SMC Uganda Ltd v Bulambuli District Local Government (Application No. 35 of 2023)
  • Mulago Hill Diagnostics Ltd v National Water and Sewerage Corporation (Application No. 13 of 2022)
  • G.E Solutions v Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (Application No. 3 of 2024)
  • Eclipse Edisoil JVC Ltd v Napak District Local Government (Application No. 33 of 2023)
  • EAA Company Limited v Uganda National Bureau of Standards (Application No. 21 of 2023)
  • Obon Infrastructure Development JV v Mbarara City and Another (Application No. 20 of 2021)
  • Old Kampala Students Association v PPDA and Old Kampala Senior Secondary School (Application No. 20 of 2021)
  • Globe World Engineering Uganda Limited v Mbarara City Council and Another (Application No. 14 of 2023)
  • China Civil Engineering and Construction Corporation v Uganda National Roads Authority (Application No. 11 of 2023)
  • MBJ Technologies Limited v Mbarara City and Others (Application No. 17 of 2022)
  • Mbarara City and Another v Obon Infrastructure Development JV (Civil Appeal No. 45 of 2021)
  • Apple Properties Limited v Uganda Human Rights Commission (Application No. 6 of 2023)
  • Tumwebaze Stephen Kiba v Mbarara City Council and Another (Application No. 21 of 2022)
  • VCON Construction (U) Ltd v Makerere University (Application No. 3 of 2022)
  • Acacia Place Ltd v Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority and Electoral Commission (Application No. 10 of 2021)
  • Kazini Fredric v Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority (Application No. 16 of 2015)
  • Galleria in Africa Ltd v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal 2017) [2018] UGSC 19
  • Vital Capital Investments Limited and 2 Others v Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (Application No. 16 of 2023)
  • Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd (1989) KLR 1

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tijas Investment Limited v Lira City Council (Application 5 of 2024) 2024 UGPPDPAAT 6 (8 February 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.