Amudo v Secretary General of the East African Community

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.

Holding

The Court held that the Secretary General acted ultra vires in implementing the Council of Ministers' decision by appointing the Claimant as a Project Accountant under RISP funding instead of as a Professional Staff member under EAC Staff Rules and Regulations. The Claimant was entitled to a five-year contract governed by EAC Staff Rules and Regulations. The Court awarded special damages of USD 9,024 for loss of earnings during the period the Claimant should have served under the proper contract terms, but dismissed claims for general and aggravated damages.

Outcome

Claim partly allowed; Claimant awarded special damages and costs; general and aggravated damages dismissed

Facts

Angela Amudo, a professional accountant, was appointed by the Council of Ministers of the East African Community on 13th September 2008 as a Project Accountant to replace Mr. Ponziano Nyeko who had resigned. The Council appointed her as a Professional Staff member. However, the Secretary General's letter of appointment dated 29th September 2008 stated she was appointed as a Project Accountant under RISP funding, not as a regular staff member under EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006). She was given an initial contract of 20 months instead of the five-year contract applicable to Professional Staff under Regulation 22(1)(c). Her contract was subsequently renewed in short periodic extensions until 30th April 2012. The Claimant raised concerns about the misrepresentation of the Council's decision but received no redress, leading her to file this claim.

Issues

1. Whether the Claimant's claim is time-barred under Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty.
2. Whether the Claimant was a staff member governed by the EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006).
3. Whether the position of Project Accountant that the Claimant held would entitle her to a five year contract with a possibility of renewal.
4. What remedies are available to the Parties?

Orders

• The appointment of the Claimant for an initial period of twenty (20) months and subsequent periodical extensions up to 30th April 2012 were ultra vires the powers of the Secretary General and his deputies and inconsistent with the EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006).
• The Claimant was entitled to a contract of employment for a period of five (5) years in accordance with EAC Staff Rules and Regulations.
• The Claimant is entitled to special damages for loss of earning in the sum of USD 9,024.00.
• Claims for general damages and aggravated damages dismissed.
• The Claimant awarded half of the taxed costs to be borne by the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (18)

• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 9
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 9(4)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 14
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 14(3)(a)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 14(3)(c)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 14(3)(d)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 14(3)(g)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 16
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30(2)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 31
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 70(2)
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 71(1)
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 1
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 18
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 20(2)
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 22(1)
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 22(1)(c)
• EAC Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) Regulation 23(8)

Cases cited (12)

• Cheshire and Fifoot's Law of Contract, 9th Edition by M.P Furmston published by London Butterworth 1976 No.7
• Scott v Brown Dowering, NC Nab & Co [1892] 2 QB 728
• Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Ltd (EATRF/1998/0297)
• L'Estrange v F Graucob Ltd [1934] 2 KB 394
• Peepay Intermak Ltd vs. Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [Care No: A3/2005]
• Kengrow Industries Ltd vs. Chdaran [Civil Appeal No.7 of 2001]
• Namyols Josephine vs. National Curriculum Development Centre [2008] HCT-00-CV-0122- 2008
• Pan African Insurance Company (U) Ltd vs. International Air Transport Assoc. 00-cc-cs-0667 of 2003
• Litwin Construction (1973) Ltd, 29 BCLR (2(d))
• White & Carter (Council) Ltd v McGregor [1962] AC 413
• Tumusiime Fidelis v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 88 of 2003)
• Georges Wanyera vs. Kabira Sugar ltd, 1985 (in the High Court of Uganda at Jinja), HCT-C.S.-0058-1997

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