Mpuugu and Sons Transporters Limited v Attorney General and Another
Mpuugu and Sons Transporters Limited v Attorney General and Another (Civil Appeal 63 of 1999) [2001] UGCA 27 (27 April 2001)
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not err in referring to the report (ID1) as it was only relevant to the viability of the route, which was abandoned as a ground of appeal. The judge's reliance on Article 126(2)(e) of the Constitution to justify the unsigned document was improper, but no miscarriage of justice occurred. The interests of the appellant were considered by the Transport Licensing Board as required by Section 91(2)(e) of the Traffic and Road Safety Act, and the appellant was invited to meetings regarding the licence but failed to attend. There was no evidence of fr…
Source excerpt
- Licensing Disputes
- Transport Regulation
- Judicial Review
- Evidentiary Requirements