Wakilii

Atiku Richard Aluma and Another v Gulu University Hoima Campus (Labour Dispute Reference No. 130 2018)

Industrial Court · [2025] UGIC 49 · 2025 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Labour dispute claim for wrongful and illegal termination filed in the Industrial Court
Decision
Claimants awarded salary arrears for six months of part-time teaching services; claim for wrongful termination dismissed as the Kingdom, not the Respondent, terminated their employment.

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 Industrial Court held that the claimants, initially engaged by Bunyoro Kitara Royal University (BUKIRU) as part-time lecturers, became employees of Gulu University Hoima Campus when it took over BUKIRU's operations under a Memorandum of Understanding. The Respondent, as a putative employer, supervised and assigned academic programmes to the claimants, creating a disguised employment relationship. The claimants were entitled to payment for six months of teaching services rendered. However, the court found that the Kingdom, not the Respondent, terminated their employment, and thus the Respondent was not liable for wrongful termination.

Outcome

Claimants awarded salary arrears for six months of part-time teaching services; claim for wrongful termination dismissed as the Kingdom, not the Respondent, terminated their employment.

Facts

In 2014, the claimants were engaged as lecturers by Bunyoro Kitara Royal University (BUKIRU), which failed to obtain accreditation from the National Council for Higher Education. BUKIRU entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Gulu University to establish Gulu University Hoima Campus. The claimants continued teaching for approximately six months without formal contracts or payment. They were not formally terminated by the Respondent but were dismissed by the Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom via radio and print media. The claimants withheld examination results in protest of non-payment. The Respondent contended it did not employ the claimants, as the MoU provided that the Kingdom retained authority over recruitment and remuneration of staff.

Issues

  1. Whether the Claimants were employed by the Respondent?
  2. Whether the Claimants rendered teaching services to the students of the Respondent?
  3. Whether the Claimants were terminated from work by the Respondent, and if so, whether the termination was wrongful?
  4. Whether the Claimants are entitled to the remedies prayed for?

Orders

  • The Respondent is directed to cause payment of salary arrears for six months (December 2014 to June 2015) to the claimants.
  • The 1st Claimant is awarded UGX 9,000,000 (UGX 1,500,000 per month for 6 months).
  • The 2nd Claimant is awarded UGX 10,500,000 (UGX 1,750,000 per month for 6 months).
  • Interest of 10% per annum shall accrue on the salary arrears from the date the matter was filed in 2016 until payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Employment Relationship — Disguised Employment — Putative Employer
Where an entity supervises, assigns work, and benefits from services rendered by workers initially engaged by another party, it may be deemed a putative or disguised employer, notwithstanding the absence of a formal contract, if the facts demonstrate an employment relationship based on the nature of work performed and payment arrangements.
Contract of Service — Oral Employment Contracts — Essential Elements
An employment relationship may be established by an oral contract of service, which requires an agreement (offer and acceptance), provision of work or service to an employer, and remuneration or consideration for the work rendered, as defined under Section 2 of the Employment Act 2006.
Part-Time Employment — Entitlement to Payment on Pro Rata Basis
A part-time worker, defined as someone whose normal working hours are less than those of a comparable full-time worker, is entitled to payment of wages or salary on a pro rata basis and to non-wage benefits in proportion to hours worked.
Volunteers — Distinction from Employees — Consideration
A volunteer is a person who gives services without any express or implied promise of remuneration, and unlike in a contract of service, consideration is not an essential element of a volunteer arrangement. However, where a person withholds work product in protest of non-payment, this conduct is inconsistent with volunteer status and indicates an employment relationship.
Determination of Employment Relationship — ILO Recommendation 198
In determining the existence of an employment relationship, particularly where it is disguised, the court should examine the facts of the situation, focusing on how the work is performed and how the worker is paid, rather than how the parties characterize the relationship, in accordance with ILO Recommendation 198, Part II, Article 13.
Estoppel by Conduct — Employment Relationship
An employer may be estopped by its conduct from denying that workers are its employees where, by its words or conduct, it has led the workers to believe in a particular state of affairs, and it would be unjust or inequitable to allow the employer to go back on that representation.
Agency — Memorandum of Understanding — Employer Liability
Where a Memorandum of Understanding establishes one party as the agent of another for purposes of supervising and overseeing academic programmes, the supervising party assumes the role of putative employer and is responsible for ensuring that workers assigned tasks under its supervision are paid for services rendered, even if direct financial responsibility rests with the principal.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (11)

  • Auto Garage v Motokov (1971) EA 514
  • Moorgate Mercantile Co. Ltd v Twitchings [1976] QB 225
  • Connie Kekiyonza and 2 others v Attorney General (HCCS Misc. Appln. No. 544 of 2020)
  • Green Boat Entertainment Ltd v City Council of Kampala (HCCS No. 0580 of 2003)
  • Sebuliba v Cooperative Bank Ltd (1982) HCB
  • Emma Obokullo v Walter Arnold (LDC 023 of 2014)
  • Erumiya Ebyetu v Gusperito (1985 HCB 64)
  • Issa Klakosi Wamusi v Ben Muklwana (Civil Suit No. 125 of 2012)
  • Ready Mixed Concrete (Southeast) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Assurance [1968] 2 QB 497
  • Ajambo Sylvia v Calvary Ministries (LDC No. 052 of 2018)
  • Michael Kimeu v Udhabiti Educational Trust, Kenya, and 2 others (ELRC Cause No. 394 of 2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Atiku_Richard_Aluma_and_Another_v_Gulu_University_Hoima_Campus_(Labour_Dispute_Reference_No._130_2018)_[2025]_UGIC_49_(1_June_2025)
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.