Egimu v Henly Distributors Uganda Limited (Labour Dispute Reference 178 of 2020)
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.
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 claimant's termination was unlawful because it was a termination with immediate effect for misconduct (negligence causing financial loss) without notice, payment in lieu of notice, or a fair hearing. Where an employer terminates for reasons of misconduct or poor performance, the employee is entitled to a hearing to defend himself. The court awarded payment in lieu of notice, general damages for distress caused by unlawful termination, and severance pay.
Outcome
Claimant's termination declared unlawful; monetary awards granted for payment in lieu of notice, general damages, and severance pay with interest
Facts
The claimant was employed as a stores supervisor by the respondent company on 2 August 2017. After probation, he was confirmed and given a one-year contract valid until 31 December 2018, which was renewed for a further year. On 2 October 2019, he was terminated with immediate effect due to negligence which allegedly caused the respondent substantial financial losses. The claimant had received a warning letter on 24 June 2019 and had written an apology letter on 12 June 2019. He was paid UGX 775,700 as his September 2019 salary and leave days. The claimant contended he was not given a hearing before termination and that his termination was unfair. Mediation was unsuccessful and the matter was referred to the Industrial Court.
Issues
- Whether the Claimant's termination was lawful?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- Declaration that the Claimant was unfairly and unlawfully terminated from employment by the Respondent.
- Respondent to pay the Claimant UGX 775,700 as payment in lieu of notice.
- Respondent to pay the Claimant UGX 2,543,616 as general damages.
- Respondent to pay the Claimant UGX 1,680,684 in severance pay.
- The sums above shall carry interest at 12% per annum from the date of this award until payment in full.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
Cases cited (18)
- Obonyo v Mtn (U) Ltd [2016] UGIC 24
- Sserwanga v Uganda Breweries Limited [2021] UGIC 23
- Bank of Uganda v Joseph Kibuuka [2021] UGCA 33
- Hilda Musinguzi v Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2016)
- Stanbic Bank (Uganda) Limited v Nassanga [2023] UGCA 342
- Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited v Deogratuis Asiimwe [2020] UGSC 37
- Ogwal v Kampala Pharmaceutical Industries Limited [2023] UGIC 68
- Mugisa v Equity Bank Uganda Limited [2023] UGIC 62
- Bank of Uganda v Betty Tinkamanyire [2008] UGSC 21
- Florence Mufumba v Uganda Development Bank Ltd [1965] EA 789
- Uganda Post Limited v Mukadisi [2023] UGSC 58
- Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd v Constant Okou (Civil Appeal No. 60 of 2020)
- Sadat Serungoji v Guiness Transporters T/A Safe Boda (Labour Dispute Reference No. 47 of 2022)
- Nazziwa v National Social Security Fund (Labour Dispute Reference No. 1 of 2019)
- Umeme Limited v Harriet Negesa [2019] UGIC 34
- DFCU Bank Limited v Donna Kamuli (Civil Appeal No. 121 of 2016)
- Orech Odongo Jimmy v China Wuyi Co. Ltd (Labour Dispute Reference No. 47 of 2020)
- Kahjley v Deustche Gesellschaft Fuer Internationale Zuzammenarbeit (GIZ) GMBH [2023] UGIC 89
Cases citing this judgment (2)
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.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.