Wakilii

Twed Property Development Limited v National Building Review Board (Misc Cause 274 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHCCD 209 · 2023 Judicial Review Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review seeking certiorari, prohibition, injunction, and damages arising from respondent's investigation and order to halt building development
Decision
Judicial review application allowed; respondent's report and order to halt building operations quashed; prohibition order issued; damages of UGX 50,000,000 awarded to 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

Held that the National Building Review Board acted illegally and in excess of its statutory powers under the Building Control Act 2013 by directly entertaining a complaint that should have been handled by the Building Committee, by writing to State House Anti-Corruption Unit recommending criminal prosecution and halting of building operations, and by issuing an order to halt building operations—a power vested exclusively in Building Committees. The Board also breached natural justice by failing to accord the applicant a fair hearing before making recommendations that would halt a major development project. Orders of certiorari and prohibition granted; damages of UGX 50,000,000 awarded.

Outcome

Judicial review application allowed; respondent's report and order to halt building operations quashed; prohibition order issued; damages of UGX 50,000,000 awarded to applicant

Facts

The applicant, Twed Property Development Ltd, was developing a hotel and office block on Plot 18 Kyadondo Road and Plot 16 Lourdel Road in Kampala. The respondent, National Building Review Board, received a complaint from neighbours Caleb Kakuyo and Doreen Sandra Rwambuya regarding alleged damage to a perimeter wall and building safety violations. On 18 November 2021, the respondent visited the site, found alleged contraventions of the Building Control Act, and ordered the applicant to halt building works. The respondent referred the matter to KCCA Building Committee for investigation but also wrote directly to State House Anti-Corruption Unit on 1 July 2022 with a report recommending that the developer be held responsible for safety violations and that building development be halted. The applicant's building plans had been approved by KCCA in 2018. The project was valued at over USD 95,000,000, employed over 400 persons, was financed by loans from financial institutions, and involved a franchise agreement with Hilton Worldwide. The applicant contended it was denied a fair hearing and that the respondent acted illegally and in excess of its statutory powers.

Issues

  1. Whether the application raises any grounds for judicial review?
  2. Whether the decision of the respondent to investigate the applicant's building project was illegal?
  3. Whether the respondent acted unfairly and in breach of natural justice when it issued a report to State House Anti-Corruption Unit?
  4. What remedies are available to the applicants?

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Order of certiorari issued quashing the respondent's report and/or the recommendation/decision to halt the applicant's development project.
  • Order of prohibition issued restraining the respondent from issuing such orders in respect of the matter complained of without compliance with the Building Control Act and Building Control Regulations.
  • Applicant awarded UGX 50,000,000 as damages.
  • Costs awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Statutory Powers — Ultra Vires — Regulatory Body Exceeding Jurisdiction
A statutory regulatory body acts illegally and in excess of its powers when it directly entertains and investigates a complaint that the enabling legislation vests exclusively in a subordinate body, thereby usurping the jurisdiction of that subordinate body and acting outside the four corners of the statute.
Administrative Law — Statutory Interpretation — Functions of Regulatory Bodies — Appellate vs Original Jurisdiction
Where a statute creates a regulatory board with express functions including hearing appeals from subordinate committees and monitoring building developments, the board's monitoring function does not confer implied power to exercise original jurisdiction over complaints that the statute assigns to subordinate committees as first instance decision-makers.
Administrative Law — Improper Purpose — Abuse of Power — Referral to Criminal Investigation
A regulatory body acts illegally and for an improper purpose when it writes to a criminal investigation unit recommending prosecution and halting of operations based on alleged regulatory violations, where the enabling statute does not contemplate such action and the body has not concluded its own investigation or made a final decision.
Administrative Law — Enforcement Powers — Delegation — Improper Exercise
Where a statute vests the power to halt building operations in a building committee, a regulatory board acts illegally by directly issuing an order to halt building operations, even where the board has general monitoring and oversight functions, as this constitutes usurpation of powers specifically assigned to the subordinate body.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Right to Fair Hearing — Legitimate Expectation
A regulatory body breaches the rules of natural justice when it makes findings and recommendations that would halt a major development project without according the affected party a fair hearing, particularly where the party has a legitimate expectation of being heard before a decision adversely affecting substantial rights and interests is made.
Judicial Review — Certiorari — Grounds — Illegality and Procedural Impropriety
An order of certiorari will issue to quash a decision of a public authority where the decision was reached in excess of jurisdiction, in breach of rules of natural justice, or contrary to law, and the effect of certiorari is to restore the status quo ante that existed before the quashed decision was made.
Damages & Quantum — Judicial Review — Damages for Abuse of Power — Assessment
In exceptional circumstances under judicial review, a court may award damages where there is tortious liability related to misfeasance in public office or abuse of authority, and the court will assess damages having regard to the blatant nature of the abuse of power and the financial impact on the applicant, while guarding against excessive awards.

Legislation cited (12)

Cases cited (8)

  • Citizens Alert Foundation (CAF) Ltd and 4 Others v Attorney General and 2 Others (HCMC No. 339 of 2020)
  • R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Ex parte Jeyeanthan [2000] 1 WLR 354
  • Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374
  • Lugolobu Bruce v Tororo District Local Government (HCT-04-CV-MC-0019-2014)
  • Johannesburg Stock Exchange v Witwatersrand Nigel Ltd 1988 (3) SA 132
  • Twinomuhangi v Kabale District and Others [2006] HCB 130
  • Schmidt v Secretary of State for Home Affairs [1969] 1 All ER 904
  • World Point Group Ltd v Attorney General and Uganda Revenue Authority (HCCS No. 227 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Twed Property Development Limited v National Building Review Board (Misc Cause 274 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 209 (7 July 2023)
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.