Uganda Case Law

Consortium of EAA Company Limited & East Africa Auto Technical Testing & Another v Quality Inspection Services Inc Japan & Another

Consortium of EAA Company Limited & East Africa Auto Technical Testing & Another v Quality Inspection Services Inc Japan & Another (Miscellaneous Application 1048 of 2024; Miscellaneous Application 1109 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCD 201 (20 November 2024)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 1048 of 2024 ; Miscellaneous Application 1109 of 2024

Judge

Musa Ssekaana, J

The High Court reviewed its earlier appellate ruling in a procurement dispute, set aside the prior order, cancelled the procurement and contracts, and ordered a fresh process.

• Judicial Review
• Public Procurement
• Error Apparent On Record
• Contract Award Challenge
• Functus Officio Exception
• Remedies In Procurement

Pynet Technologies SMC Limited v Ministry of Lands ,Housing and Urban Development (Application 34 of 2024)

Pynet Technologies SMC Limited v Ministry of Lands ,Housing and Urban Development (Application 34 of 2024) [2024] UGPPDPAAT 36 (18 July 2024)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 34 of 2024

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Nuwagira, Kalumba, Kyarisiima, Kayemba

The Tribunal found that while the Applicant's bid was nonresponsive to the technical specifications relating to Digital Cameras, the Evaluation Committee erred in its assessment of other technical criteria, including the dual monitor stands, 30KVA UPS, and QSFP ports. The Committee failed to exercise its discretion to seek clarification for non-material omissions and did not apply the same level of scrutiny to all bidders, resulting in unequal treatment. The evaluation process did not adhere to the cardinal principles of fairness, transparency, and non-discrimination as required by law. Conse…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Criteria
• Fairness And Transparency
• Technical Specifications
• Remedies In Procurement
• Non Discrimination

Maleka Engineering and Construction Company Limited and Another v Kira Municpal Council (Application 30 of 2024)

Maleka Engineering and Construction Company Limited and Another v Kira Municpal Council (Application 30 of 2024) [2024] UGPPDPAAT 32 (24 June 2024)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 30 of 2024

Judges

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

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's bid was correctly disqualified at the preliminary evaluation stage because its foreign joint venture partner, Teskon Muhendislik Limited STI, submitted a tax clearance certificate that was invalid as of the bid submission deadline. The certificate was for a different entity, and no evidence of a legal name change or merger was provided. The Tribunal held that an invalid eligibility document cannot be remedied by post-submission clarification. Further, the Applicant's bid was nonresponsive to mandatory requirements on personnel, equipment, and general ex…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation
• Eligibility Documents
• Joint Venture Compliance
• Tax Clearance Certificate
• Remedies In Procurement

Rexco Limited v Katakwi District Local Government (Application 28 of 2023)

Rexco Limited v Katakwi District Local Government (Application 28 of 2023) [2023] UGPPDPAAT 30 (7 December 2023)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 28 of 2023

Judges

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

The Tribunal found that the Respondent's Accounting Officer failed to make a proper administrative review decision as required by law, instead merely communicating the advisory committee's findings. The Applicant satisfied the eligibility criteria by submitting a valid PPDA Register of Providers Certificate and trading license. The introduction of new reasons for bid rejection by the administrative review committee was permissible for investigation but not for final determination of compliance, which is the evaluation committee's prerogative. The Applicant's bid was compliant regarding nation…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Errors
• Administrative Decision Making
• Remedies In Procurement
• Procedural Fairness

Rexco Limited v Katakwi District Local Government (Application 29 of 2023)

Rexco Limited v Katakwi District Local Government (Application 29 of 2023) [2023] UGPPDPAAT 29 (7 December 2023)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application 29 of 2023

Judges

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

The Tribunal allowed Rexco Limited’s procurement review, found defects in the accounting officer’s decision and evaluation process, and ordered re-evaluation of the bids.

• Public Procurement Review
• Bid Evaluation Errors
• Administrative Decision Making
• Remedies In Procurement
• Procedural Fairness
• Public-procurement-review

Mbale United and Another v Mbale City Council (Application No. 12 of 2022)

Mbale United and Another v Mbale City Council (Application No. 12 of 2022) [2022] UGPPDPAAT 12 (4 May 2022)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application No. 12 of 2022

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Isanga, Ag. Chairperson, Kakira, Kyarisiima, Kalumba

The Tribunal held that the procurement was tainted by discriminatory bidding criteria and procedural breaches, cancelled the process, and allowed retendering.

• Public Procurement
• Discriminatory Criteria
• Administrative Review
• Bid Evaluation
• Remedies In Procurement
• Public-procurement

Abasamia Hwolerane Association Limited v Jinja City Council (Application No. 12 of 2021)

Abasamia Hwolerane Association Limited v Jinja City Council (Application No. 12 of 2021) [2021] UGPPDPAAT 15 (23 August 2021)

Court

Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal

Case number

Application No. 12 of 2021

Judges

Nerima, Panel Member, Gimara SC, Chairperson, Kakira, Kalumba

The Tribunal found that Rojoke Photo Lab & Art Co. Ltd and Rojoke Photo Lab and Art, both controlled by Okiria James, submitted bids for more than one item in category 'A', constituting a conflict of interest under the procurement rules and rendering Rojoke Photo Lab & Art Co. Ltd ineligible for the contract. The initial notice of best evaluated bidder erroneously named Rojoke Photo Lab and Art at a higher commission rate, but this was a correctable administrative error. The Tribunal determined that the Applicant's alleged unsatisfactory performance was not substantiated by the evaluation rep…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Conflict Of Interest
• Bid Evaluation
• Local Government Contracts
• Remedies In Procurement
• Administrative Review