Wakilii

Agaba Kasingye Nelson v Leather Industries Of Uganda and Another (LABOUR DISPUTE REFERENCE No. 3 of 2020 Arising from & LC. NO.JCC LAB 35 JULY 2020)

Industrial Court · [2023] UGIC 130 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Oral application by claimant's counsel to proceed ex parte on grounds that respondents failed to file trial bundles and witness statements in contempt of court directives
Decision
Matter to proceed ex parte against both respondents following expungement of 1st respondent's late-filed evidence

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

Held that where respondents failed to file trial bundles and witness statements for almost two years despite multiple court directives, their conduct amounted to inordinate delay and contempt of court. The 1st respondent's attempt to file evidence three days before hearing without seeking leave of court could not be permitted. The late-filed trial bundle and witness statement were expunged and the claimant was granted leave to proceed ex parte.

Outcome

Matter to proceed ex parte against both respondents following expungement of 1st respondent's late-filed evidence

Facts

The claimant was employed by the 1st respondent as Manager of Environment and later promoted to Chief Operations Officer. In January 2020, while on annual leave, he was replaced and subsequently terminated on 17 April 2020. He challenged the termination before the Labour Officer who referred the dispute to the Industrial Court on 9 September 2020. The reference was registered on 2 October 2020. The court issued multiple directives for parties to file trial bundles and witness statements starting from 14 December 2020. The 2nd respondent initially filed an interlocutory application challenging jurisdiction which was dismissed on 19 March 2021. Despite further directives on 22 November 2021 and 29 November 2021, neither respondent filed their evidence. At the pre-session hearing on 24 May 2023, neither respondent attended and neither had filed evidence. The 1st respondent attempted to file and serve its trial bundle on 2 June 2023, three days before the scheduled hearing, without seeking leave of court. The claimant's counsel applied orally to proceed ex parte on grounds that the respondents were in contempt of court directives.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondents' failure to file trial bundles and witness statements despite multiple court directives amounted to contempt of court.
  2. Whether the claimant should be permitted to proceed ex parte given the respondents' non-compliance with procedural directions.
  3. Whether the 1st respondent's late filing of trial bundle and witness statement on 2 June 2023 without leave of court should be admitted.

Orders

  • Application to expunge the 1st respondent's trial bundle and witness statement filed on 2 June 2023 is granted.
  • The 1st respondent's trial bundle and witness statement are expunged from the record.
  • Application for the claimant to proceed ex parte is granted.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Filing of Evidence — Compliance with Court Directives — Consequences of Non-Compliance
Where parties are directed by court to file trial bundles and witness statements in accordance with Order 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules, evidence must be filed in accordance with the directions of court and not based on receipt of a hearing notice.
Civil Procedure — Inordinate Delay — Disregard of Court Directives — Contempt of Court
Where a party fails to comply with court directives to file evidence for almost two years despite multiple opportunities, such conduct amounts to inordinate delay and contempt of court, and counsel should not be permitted to disregard court directives and file court process as they choose.
Civil Procedure — Late Filing — Leave of Court — Expungement of Documents
A party's attempt to file evidence three days before a scheduled hearing, almost two years after the court's initial directive and without seeking leave of court, cannot be permitted and the late-filed documents will be expunged from the record.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Grounds for Granting Leave
Where respondents have totally disregarded court directives to file evidence over an extended period without justifiable reason, the court will grant an application for the claimant to proceed ex parte.
Civil Procedure — Constitutional Right to Fair Hearing — Abuse of Court Process
The constitutional right to a fair hearing under Article 126(2)(e) does not apply to circumstances where a party's counsel has disregarded court directives and engaged in dilatory conduct amounting to abuse of court process, and the mistakes of counsel in such circumstances will be visited upon the litigant.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Employment Act 2006 s.43(6)
  • Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) (Industrial Court Procedure) Rules 2012 r.5
  • Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) (Industrial Court Procedure) Rules 2012 r.7
  • Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019 Order 18 r.5(1)
  • Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2019 Order 18 r.6
  • Constitution of Uganda Article 126(2)(e)

Cases cited (3)

  • Kezaala Muhamed v Batambuze Majid (Election Petition No. 23 of 2019)
  • Mastulah Musazi Kiirya T/A Mastulah Enterprises Ltd v Emudong Silver Aogon and Another (Civil Suit No. 074 of 2013)
  • Kezaala Mohammed Baswire Batwagaine v Batambuze Majid (Court of Appeal No. 66 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Agaba_Kasingye_Nelson_v_Leather_Industries_Of_Uganda_and_Another_(LABOUR_DISPUTE_REFERENCE_No._3_of_2020_Arising_from_&_LC._NO.JCC_LAB_35_JULY_2020)_[2023]_UGIC_130_(8_June_2023)
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.