Wakilii

Vision Scientific and Engineering Limited v Makerere University (Application No 26 of 2022)

Tribunal · [2022] UGPPDPAAT 25 · 2022 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of Accounting Officer's decision dismissing administrative review complaint on grounds of non-payment of fees
Decision
Matter remitted to Accounting Officer to guide applicant on fees, receive payment, and decide complaint on merits within statutory timeline

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 an Accounting Officer breaches statutory duty by dismissing an administrative review complaint for non-payment of fees without first guiding the complainant on the amount and mode of payment. A decision communicated outside the ten-day statutory timeline is a nullity. The Tribunal remitted the matter to the Accounting Officer to guide the applicant on fees, receive payment, and decide the complaint on its merits within ten days.

Outcome

Matter remitted to Accounting Officer to guide applicant on fees, receive payment, and decide complaint on merits within statutory timeline

Facts

Vision Scientific & Engineering Limited responded to a tender by Makerere University for supply of laboratory equipment. On 2 August 2022, Makerere declared Palin Corporation Limited the best bidder and disqualified the applicant for quoting a higher price. On 12 August 2022, the applicant applied for administrative review before the Accounting Officer but was not guided on the required fees or payment modalities. On 19 August 2022, the Accounting Officer dismissed the complaint on grounds of non-payment of prescribed administrative review fees. The applicant received this decision on 24 August 2022, outside the statutory ten-day timeline. The applicant then applied to the Tribunal on 31 August 2022, contending that the Accounting Officer erred by failing to guide on fees and by communicating a decision outside the statutory period.

Issues

  1. Whether the Accounting Officer erred in law and fact when he dismissed the complaint of the Applicant on the ground of non-payment of fees?
  2. Whether the Accounting Officer erred in law and fact when he failed or omitted to make and communicate a decision on the complaint of the Applicant within statutory timelines?
  3. Whether in light of the said acts and omissions of the Accounting Officer, the Tribunal can inquire into the substance of the complaint filed by the Applicant before the Accounting Officer?

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Decision of the Accounting Officer dated August 19, 2022 declared a nullity and set aside.
  • Accounting Officer directed, within two days from the date hereof, to guide the Applicant in writing on the amount and mode of payment of the administrative review fees.
  • Applicant must pay administrative review fees within one working day of being so guided.
  • Subject to payment of fees, Accounting Officer directed to hear and consider the Applicant's complaint and any submissions thereto, and make and communicate a decision in writing no later than 10 days from date of this decision.
  • Suspension order dated August 26, 2022 vacated.
  • Each party to bear own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Duty to Guide on Fees
An Accounting Officer has a statutory duty to guide a complainant on the required administrative review fees and where to pay them upon receipt of a complaint. The Accounting Officer may only dismiss a complaint for non-payment of fees if the complainant fails to pay even after being guided.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Non-Payment of Fees Not Fatal
Non-payment of administrative review fees is not necessarily fatal as long as the fees can be assessed and paid. Late payment of administrative review fees is not fatal, consistent with the principle that even actual non-payment of court fees is not fatal so long as proper fees can be assessed and paid.
Administrative Law — Public Procurement — Administrative Review — Statutory Timelines
Section 89(7) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act requires the Accounting Officer to make and communicate an administrative review decision within ten days from the date of receipt of the application. A decision communicated outside this statutory timeline is made in breach of the law and is a nullity.
Statutory Interpretation — Public Procurement — Payment of Fees — No Time Restriction
The payment of fees for purposes of administrative review application under Section 89(3)(a) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (Amendment) Act 2021 is not restricted to be within the ten working days stated in Section 89(7).

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (6)

  • VCON Construction (U) Ltd v Uganda Development Bank (Application No. 22 of 2021)
  • Samanga Elcomplus JV v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (Application No. 17 of 2021)
  • Kasokoso Services Limited v Jinja School of Nursing and Midwifery (Application No. 13 of 2021)
  • Lawrence Muwanga v Stephen Kyeyune (Legal Representative of Christine Kisamba, Deceased) (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2001)
  • Meera Investments Limited v URA & Numani Mubiakulamusa (Application No. 18 of 2022)
  • Technology Associates Ltd & COMVIVA Technologies Ltd v Postbank Uganda Ltd (Application No. 06 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Vision Scientific and Engineering Limited v Makerere University (Application No 26 of 2022) 2022 UGPPDPAAT 25 (21 September 2022)
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.