Electricity Disputes Tribunal - 2007

Sort by:

1 judgment

Citation	Judgment date
March 2007
Electro-Maxx Uganda Limited v Electricity Regulatory Authority (EDT Appeals 1 of 2006) [2007] UGEDT 1 (9 March 2007) Agreeing to re‑evaluate bids rendered the appellant’s main reliefs largely moot; ERA may be a proper party but the Tribunal declined further substantive reliefs. * Administrative law – statutory licensing authority – ERA constituted a body corporate that may be sued and be made a party to appeals to the EDT under s.38(2) of the Electricity Act; not immune despite quasi‑judicial characteristics. * Mootness – where parties agree and initiate a re‑evaluation of bids, principal reliefs seeking the same are rendered academic and may preclude further hearing. * Natural justice – a tribunal will not disqualify or adversely affect a non‑party bidder without affording that bidder an opportunity to be heard. * Remedies – Tribunal will not ipso facto award a licence where process (re‑evaluation) is agreed and ongoing.	9 March 2007

Citation

Judgment date

March 2007

Electro-Maxx Uganda Limited v Electricity Regulatory Authority (EDT Appeals 1 of 2006) [2007] UGEDT 1 (9 March 2007)

Agreeing to re‑evaluate bids rendered the appellant’s main reliefs largely moot; ERA may be a proper party but the Tribunal declined further substantive reliefs.

* Administrative law – statutory licensing authority – ERA constituted a body corporate that may be sued and be made a party to appeals to the EDT under s.38(2) of the Electricity Act; not immune despite quasi‑judicial characteristics. * Mootness – where parties agree and initiate a re‑evaluation of bids, principal reliefs seeking the same are rendered academic and may preclude further hearing. * Natural justice – a tribunal will not disqualify or adversely affect a non‑party bidder without affording that bidder an opportunity to be heard. * Remedies – Tribunal will not ipso facto award a licence where process (re‑evaluation) is agreed and ongoing.

9 March 2007