Wakilii

201 Former Employees of G4S Security Services Uganda Ltd v G4S Security Services (Uganda) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 653 of 2007)

High Court · [2009] UGHC 263 · 2009 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enforcement of labour dispute award from Kampala District Labour Office
Decision
Application allowed; applicants granted enforcement of labour dispute award and awarded costs

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The High Court has unlimited original jurisdiction under Article 139 of the Constitution to enforce a labour dispute award from the District Labour Office, notwithstanding the appellate mechanism under the Employment Act 2006. An Act of Parliament cannot oust the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. Where the Industrial Court is non-functional, the availability of an administrative remedy does not fetter the right of citizens to access the High Court for judicial relief.

Outcome

Application allowed; applicants granted enforcement of labour dispute award and awarded costs

Facts

250 former employees of G4S Security Services Uganda Ltd obtained an award of UGX 122,800,000 from the Kampala District Labour Office on 28 February 2007 in Labour Dispute No. CB 954 of 2006. The respondent company failed to pay the award and purported to file an appeal to the Industrial Court, but did not pursue it due to the absence of a functional Industrial Court. The respondent argued it could not obtain the required leave to appeal nor a stay of execution because the Industrial Court was not operational. The applicants filed Miscellaneous Application No. 653 of 2007 on 6 December 2007 seeking enforcement of the labour award through the High Court, invoking Article 139 of the Constitution and Section 33 of the Judicature Act.

Issues

  1. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to enforce a labour dispute award from the District Labour Office when the Employment Act 2006 provides for appeals to the Industrial Court.
  2. Whether the availability of an administrative remedy under the Employment Act 2006 ousts the original jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 139 of the Constitution.
  3. Whether the applicants are entitled to enforcement of the labour dispute award given the non-existence of a functional Industrial Court.

Orders

  • The award of Kampala District Labour Officers in Labour Dispute No. CB 954 of 2006 be executed by the High Court.
  • Judgment is entered for the applicants in the sum of UGX 122,800,000.
  • Applicants are free to execute the judgment in the manner provided by law.
  • Costs to be borne by the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Law — High Court Jurisdiction — Original Jurisdiction — Limitation by Statute
An Act of Parliament cannot oust the original jurisdiction of the High Court except by an amendment of the Constitution. Article 139 of the Constitution confers unlimited original jurisdiction on the High Court in all matters, which cannot be fettered by ordinary legislation.
Administrative Law — Administrative Remedies — Relationship with Judicial Remedies — Right of Access to Courts
The availability of an administrative remedy under statute does not fetter the right of a citizen to access a court of law for a judicial remedy. A party may choose either to apply to an administrative tribunal for review or file suit in the High Court to redress a dispute.
Employment & Labour — Labour Disputes — Appeals from Labour Officer — Jurisdiction of High Court
Where the Employment Act 2006 provides for appeals from the Labour Officer to the Industrial Court but the Industrial Court is non-functional, the High Court may exercise its original jurisdiction under Article 139 of the Constitution to enforce a labour dispute award and prevent indefinite denial of parties' rights.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers of Court — Section 33 Judicature Act — Preventing Multiplicity of Proceedings
Section 33 of the Judicature Act 1996 empowers the High Court to grant remedies legal or equitable to completely and finally determine controversy between parties and prevent a multiplicity of legal proceedings, including enforcement of awards from administrative tribunals where the statutory appellate mechanism is unavailable.
Constitutional Law — Fundamental Rights — Right to Fair and Speedy Hearing — Article 28
The right to a fair and speedy hearing under Article 28 of the Constitution would be denied if parties were unable to realise the fruits of judgment because the statutory appellate tribunal is non-operational. Courts must respect and promote fundamental human rights and provide effective remedies.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (7)

  • Commissioner General, Uganda Revenue Authority v Meera Investments Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2007)
  • Makhangu vs. Kibwana Court of Appeal of Kenya at Mombasa Case No. 084 of 1990
  • David Kayondo v Cooperative Bank (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 1091 of 1991)
  • Hilda Musinguzi v Stanbic Bank (Civil Suit No. 124 of 2008)
  • Taperu vs. Roitel [1968] E. A. 618
  • Mayera and another vs. Atura Ranch Ltd. 1972 E. A. 347
  • Commissioner General Civil Appeal No. 055 of 2003

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

201 Former Employees of G4S Security Services Uganda Ltd v G4S Security Services (Uganda) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application 653 of 2007) [2009] UGHC 263 (20 July 2009)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.