Uganda Case Law

Gibb (PTY) Limited in Joint Venture with Acmirs consulting Limited v Ministry of Works and Transport and Another (Application No. 16 of 2025)

Gibb (PTY) Limited in Joint Venture with Acmirs consulting Limited v Ministry of Works and Transport and Another (Application No. 16 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 19 (17 July 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application No. 16 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Cyrus Titus Aomu, Penal Member

The Tribunal found that the Respondents erred in law by disqualifying the Applicant's bid for non-submission of registered joint venture powers of attorney, as such eligibility documents, if valid at the bid submission deadline, should have been requested through clarification in accordance with the procurement regulations. The Tribunal also determined that there was no mandatory requirement in the bidding documents for submission of tax clearance certificates at the time of bid submission; eligibility declarations in the technical proposal sufficed. The Respondents' failure to apply the corr…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Criteria
• Eligibility Documents
• Clarification Procedure

Buu -Lepu Foundation Limited v Lira City Council (Application 15 of 2025)

Buu -Lepu Foundation Limited v Lira City Council (Application 15 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 16 (14 July 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 15 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal found that the Respondent's Accounting Officer failed to make and communicate a decision within the statutory ten-day period following receipt of the Applicant's administrative review complaint. Under section 106(8) and 115(2)(b) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act, the Applicant was required to file its application within ten days from the expiry of the period for the Accounting Officer to make a decision. The Tribunal determined that the last permissible day for filing was June 16, 2025, as June 15, 2025, fell on a Sunday. The Applicant filed its applica…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Criteria
• Administrative Timelines
• Access To Information
• Standstill Period
• Natural Justice

Orion Tranformers and Electronics Limited v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (Application 14 of 2025)

Orion Tranformers and Electronics Limited v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (Application 14 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 18 (3 July 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 14 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kayemba, Kyarisiima, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal approved Orion Transformers' withdrawal of its procurement review application, ordered each party to bear its own costs, and vacated the suspension order.

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Challenge
• Withdrawal Of Application
• Public-procurement
• Application-withdrawal
• Judicial-review

UAP Old Mutual Insurance (U) Limited v National Medical Stores (Application 10 of 2025)

UAP Old Mutual Insurance (U) Limited v National Medical Stores (Application 10 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 13 (15 April 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 10 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal set aside an insurance award to Sanlam and ordered re-evaluation, holding that regulatory guidance could not amend the tender’s stated vehicle classification.

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Criteria
• Insurance Regulatory Compliance
• Contract Award Challenge
• Public-procurement-review
• Bid-evaluation-criteria

Gamose Holdings Limited v Lira University (Application 8 of 2025)

Gamose Holdings Limited v Lira University (Application 8 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 12 (27 March 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 8 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba

The Tribunal struck out Gamose Holdings’ review as out of time, holding the accounting officer’s failure to decide within ten calendar days made the application late.

• Public Procurement Review
• Statutory Timelines
• Jurisdiction Of Tribunal
• Administrative Decisions
• Public-procurement
• Administrative-review

Emtec Technical Services Limited v Uganda High court Commission Dare -es-Salaam, Tanzania (Application 5 of 2025)

Emtec Technical Services Limited v Uganda High court Commission Dare -es-Salaam, Tanzania (Application 5 of 2025) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 8 (13 March 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 5 of 2025

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal set aside a procurement disqualification, holding that the bidder’s foreign-contractor letter satisfied the bidding document and that clarification should have been sought.

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Criteria
• Administrative Review
• Contract Award Challenge
• Public-procurement
• Bid-evaluation

Dot Gov Solution LLC v National Information Technology Uganda (Application 49 of 2024)

Dot Gov Solution LLC v National Information Technology Uganda (Application 49 of 2024) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 2 (14 January 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 49 of 2024

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal held that the Applicant's proposal validity expired on October 24, 2024, and the Applicant declined to extend it despite the Respondent's request. Under the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205 and relevant regulations, only a bidder with a valid proposal at the time of application has locus standi to seek administrative review. The Applicant, having lost bidder status upon expiry of its proposal validity, was not entitled to bring the application. The Tribunal further found that a bidder cannot change its status to a person whose rights are adversely affe…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Validity Period
• Locus Standi
• Power Of Attorney Requirements

CRJE (East Africa) Limited v National Council for Higher Education (Application 48 of 2024)

CRJE (East Africa) Limited v National Council for Higher Education (Application 48 of 2024) [2025] UGPPDPAAT 1 (9 January 2025)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 48 of 2024

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application because the subject matter was already pending before the High Court, a superior court, and the reliefs sought were substantially the same. The Tribunal held that once it rendered its decision in Application No. 27 of 2024, it became functus officio and could not revisit the matter except for clerical corrections. The Applicant's pursuit of parallel proceedings in both the Tribunal and the High Court constituted an abuse of process, barred by Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act. The Tribunal emphasized that jurisdict…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Tribunal Jurisdiction
• Abuse Of Process
• Functus Officio
• Parallel Proceedings

Palm Construction Company Limited v Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (Application 45 of 2024)

Palm Construction Company Limited v Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (Application 45 of 2024) [2024] UGPPDPAAT 44 (13 November 2024)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 45 of 2024

Judges

Gimara SC, Chairperson, Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, cyrus Titus Aomu, penal member

The Tribunal found that the Applicant, having participated in the procurement and filed a complaint, was entitled to an administrative review decision from the Respondent's Accounting Officer within the statutory ten-day period. The Respondent failed to make or communicate such a decision within the prescribed timeframe, rendering subsequent communications irrelevant. However, the Applicant did not file its application to the Tribunal within the ten days following the lapse of the Accounting Officer's decision period, as required by law. The Tribunal emphasized that statutory timelines for pr…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Administrative Review Timelines
• Bid Evaluation Errors
• Jurisdictional Limits

Meera Investment Limited v National Lotteries Board and Another (Application 44 of 2024)

Meera Investment Limited v National Lotteries Board and Another (Application 44 of 2024) [2024] UGPPDPAAT 42 (5 November 2024)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 44 of 2024

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba

The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to provide credible evidence of extending its bid validity beyond September 30, 2024, as required by the bidding documents and procurement regulations. The purported bid extension letter was not on the official Procurement Action File, was not referenced in the administrative review complaint, and was only introduced after the hearing in a manner that did not satisfy the evidential burden. As a result, the Applicant ceased to be a bidder after September 30, 2024, and lacked locus standi to apply to the Tribunal for review. The Tribunal held that th…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Validity
• Bidder Eligibility
• Contract Award Challenge
• Disqualification Of Bid
• Locus Standi