Wakilii

Uganda Law Society & Another v Tumukunde & Another (Miscellaneous Application 1178 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 3 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to add the Attorney General as a necessary party to judicial review proceedings
Decision
Application dismissed with costs to the Respondents

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 dismissed an application to add the Attorney General as a party to judicial review proceedings, holding that the applicants lacked locus standi because they filed the joinder application before entering appearance by filing their affidavit-in-reply to the main suit. Additionally, the court found no basis to add the Attorney General because judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits, and the Attorney General did not participate in the challenged decision-making process.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs to the Respondents

Facts

On 14 October 2024, Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde, President of the Uganda Law Society, issued Executive Order RNB No. 1 of 2024 expelling the Attorney General and Solicitor General from the Uganda Law Society Council. In response, Tonny Tumukunde and Byamazima Joshua filed Miscellaneous Cause No. 228 of 2024 for judicial review, challenging the directive as contravening the Uganda Law Society Act. On 13 November 2024, the Uganda Law Society and Ssemakadde filed this application seeking to add the Attorney General as a necessary party to the judicial review proceedings. However, they did not file their affidavit-in-reply to the main suit until 19 November 2024, one week after filing the joinder application.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicants had locus standi to file the application to add a necessary party when they had not yet filed their affidavit-in-reply to the main suit (preliminary objection).
  2. Whether the Respondents have locus standi to file the application for judicial review.
  3. Whether the Attorney General should be added as a necessary party to Miscellaneous Cause No. 228 of 2024.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Locus Standi — Entry of Appearance — Requirement to File Defence Before Participating in Proceedings
A defendant who fails to file a defence or affidavit-in-reply to a suit puts himself out of court and no longer has any locus standi to participate in further proceedings, including filing interlocutory applications arising from the main suit.
Pleadings — Courts Bound by Prayers Sought — Relief Not Prayed For
A court cannot grant relief which has not been claimed in the plaint or pleadings and must restrict its decision to matters which were pleaded. A party is bound by their own pleadings.
Nature of Judicial Review — Focus on Process Not Merits
Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not with the decision itself or its merits. The jurisdiction is exercised in a supervisory manner to ensure that public powers are exercised in accordance with basic standards of legality, fairness and rationality.
Joinder of Parties — Necessary Party — Basis for Addition
For a party to be added as a necessary party to judicial review proceedings challenging a decision-making process, there must be evidence that the party participated in or was involved in the decision-making process being challenged. Where the party was not involved in the process, there is no basis for joinder.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (19)

  • Hajji Asumani Mutekanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1995)
  • Attorney General & Uganda Commercial Bank Ltd v Westmont Land (Asia) BHD & 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 593 of 1999)
  • Sengendo v Attorney General [1972] 1 EA 140
  • Kanji Devji v Damor Jinabhai & Co [1934] 1 EACA 87
  • Agadi Didi v James Namakaso (High Court Civil Suit No. 1230 of 1988)
  • Administrator General v Kakooza & Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2017)
  • Makerere University v Makerere University Staff Tribunal & Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 639 of 2024)
  • Legal Brains Trust Ltd v Attorney General & Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 638 of 2014)
  • Water & Environment Media Network (U) Ltd & 2 Others v NEMA & Hoima Sugar Ltd (Miscellaneous Cause No. 239 & 255 of 2020)
  • Editors Guild Uganda Limited & Another v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 400 of 2020)
  • Fang Min v Belex Tours & Travel Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2013)
  • Kololo Curing Co Ltd v West Mengo Co-op Union Ltd [1981] HCB 60
  • Samson Ssempasa v PK Sengendo (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 577 of 2013)
  • Nabukenya Sarah and 7 Others v Sulaiman Mukasa and 4 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 193 & 231 of 2022)
  • Departed Asians Property Custodian Board v Jaffer Brothers Ltd [1999] 1 EA 55
  • Hezekiah Mukiibi & Another v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause No. 98 of 2019)
  • Attorney General & Another v Uganda Law Society (Miscellaneous Cause No. 321 of 2012)
  • Attorney General v Yustus Tinkasimiire & 18 Others (Civil Appeal No. 208 of 2013)
  • Koluo Joseph Andrew & Others v Attorney General and Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 106 of 2010)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda Law Society & Another v Tumukunde & Another (Miscellaneous Application 1178 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 3 (17 January 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.