Uganda Christian University (UCU) has been ordered to pay Shs100 million in damages to a law student after the High Court found that the university acted unfairly and irrationally by questioning academic credits it had accepted four years earlier.
In a ruling delivered on Friday, Justice Bernard Namanya held that UCU breached Samantha Mwesigye’s legitimate expectation after admitting her to its Bachelor of Laws programme in 2022 on the basis of academic credits transferred from King’s College London, only to raise fresh requirements as she prepared to graduate.
The dispute arose from Mwesigye’s first year of law studies at King’s College London in the United Kingdom, where she successfully completed several modules before seeking admission to UCU.
On August 30, 2022, UCU admitted her under a “Transfer of Credits” arrangement and allowed her to proceed directly to Semester Two of Year One. She subsequently completed the four-year law programme and expected to graduate in July 2026.
However, shortly before graduation, the university informed her that she had to undertake four additional courses — Introduction to the Bible, Legal Writing, Fundamentals of Criminal Law and Constitutional History — and also produce a certificate of equivalence from the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE) for the credits earned in the United Kingdom.
Feeling aggrieved, Mwesigye turned to court, arguing that UCU had never informed her at admission that she would be required to retake first-year courses or obtain an NCHE equivalence certificate.
Justice Namanya agreed.
The judge noted that UCU’s own admission letter expressly stated that Mwesigye had been admitted on the basis of transferred credits and contained no requirement for an equivalence certificate or additional coursework.
He rejected attempts by university officials to later argue that she had been admitted on the basis of her secondary school qualifications rather than transferred credits.
The court found that throughout her studies, UCU consistently treated Mwesigye as a student in good standing.
She was cleared to contest for and serve as Guild President, a position whose eligibility requirements included scrutiny of academic records, and was later introduced to the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs as a student awaiting graduation during her internship placement.
According to the judge, those actions reinforced her belief that her academic status had been fully regularised and that the transferred credits had been accepted.
The court further faulted the university for failing to formally communicate its position regarding the disputed credits and instead leaving the student uncertain about her academic standing until the final stages of her degree programme.
Justice Namanya concluded that UCU’s actions were tainted by irrationality, procedural impropriety and a breach of legitimate expectation, all recognised grounds for judicial review.
While declining to compel the university to graduate Mwesigye, the judge stressed that decisions relating to academic awards remain within the mandate of universities and NCHE.
However, he held that the university’s conduct had caused the student loss, anxiety, inconvenience and uncertainty and therefore warranted compensation.
The court awarded Mwesigye Shs100 million in general damages, together with interest at 25 per cent per annum from the date of judgment until payment in full, and ordered UCU to meet the costs of the suit.
The ruling is expected to resonate across Uganda’s higher education sector, particularly among universities that admit students through credit-transfer arrangements.
It signals that institutions cannot recognise transferred academic credits, permit students to spend years pursuing a programme and then introduce new academic requirements at the point of graduation.
The judgment also reinforces the principle that universities, including private institutions, remain accountable for administrative decisions that affect students and may face legal consequences where those decisions are found to be unfair, inconsistent or procedurally flawed.