Doreen Rugundu v International Law Institute [2006] UGSC 18

Observed later treatment

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 Supreme Court dismissed a second appeal arising from the repudiation of a fixed-term employment contract before its commencement date. The Court held that where an employer repudiates a contract of personal service before performance begins, the employee acquires no accrued contractual rights and cannot recover the remuneration she would have earned; her only remedy is damages for being prevented from earning remuneration, subject to a duty to mitigate. As the respondent gave over four months' notice — far exceeding the seven days required under section 24(1) of the Employment Act for a probationary contract — and offered re-engagement on the original terms which the appellant rejected, she suffered no compensable loss. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; Court of Appeal decision reversing the High Court award upheld

Facts

On 25 July 2000 the respondent interviewed the appellant for the post of Special Assistant to the Executive Director/Assistant Marketing Manager. By letter dated 28 July 2000 the respondent offered her the post on a fixed-term contract running from 3 January 2001 to 31 December 2001, including a six-month probation period, at a gross monthly salary of Shs. 1,500,000 plus benefits. The appellant accepted and a contract of employment was executed. On 29 August 2000, before the commencement date and before the appellant began work, the respondent informed her that her services were no longer required. After the appellant's advocates demanded damages, the respondent, on 16 January 2001, offered to re-engage her on the original contract terms. The appellant rejected the re-offer, having secured other employment, and filed suit in the High Court claiming salary, benefits and general damages for breach of contract.

Issues

1. Whether an employee acquires accrued rights under a contract of employment that is repudiated by the employer before the agreed commencement date.
2. Whether the appellant suffered any loss or damage capable of attracting an award of damages.
3. Whether the termination of the contract by more than four months' notice was lawful under the Employment Act.

Orders

• Appeal dismissed.
• Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent in the Supreme Court and in the courts below.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Employment Act s.24(1)

Cases cited (7)

• Universal Cargo Carriers Corporation v Citati [1957] 2 All ER 70
• Gunton v Richmond-upon-Thames London Borough Council [1981] 1 Ch 448
• Laws v London Chronicle (Indicator Newspapers) Ltd [1959] 2 All ER 285
• Hochster v De La Tour [1843-60] All ER Rep 12
• Vine v National Dock Labour Board [1956] 1 QB 658
• Decro-Wall International SA v Practitioners in Marketing Ltd [1971] 1 WLR 361
• Denmark Productions Ltd v Boscobel Productions Ltd [1969] 1 QB 699

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Multiple ICD(U) Limited v Jaco Commercial Agencies Limited (Civil Appeal No.125 of 2020)

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