Acungwire v Mumtaz Kassam and Others
Acungwire v Mumtaz Kassam and Others (Civil Suit No. 339 of 2019) [2023] UGHCLD 41 (28 February 2023)
The court found that the DAPCB, as a public body, is subject to the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act (2003) and failed to provide evidence of compliance in procuring the legal services of M/s. Guma & Co Advocates. On the authority of Attorney General & Hon. Nyombi Peter v. Uganda Law Society, the court held that such non-compliance renders the representation illegal. Furthermore, the court determined that M/s. Guma & Co Advocates' simultaneous representation of both the DAPCB and the plaintiff (Justice Acungwire), who are in a legal dispute over the same property, creates…
Source excerpt
- Conflict Of Interest
- Legal Representation
- Public Procurement Compliance
- Allocation Of Expropriated Property