Gulaballi Ushalani v Kampala Pharmaceuticals Limited (Civil Suit 349 of 1993)
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 a limited liability company retains its legal personality and contractual obligations upon a change of name or transfer of shares. Where the defendant company changed its name from Inlex Pharmaceuticals to Kampala Pharmaceuticals and transferred shareholding, it remained bound by the employment contract concluded with the plaintiff. The company could not shelter behind indemnity agreements executed by former shareholders, as the company is a separate legal person from its shareholders. The plaintiff was entitled to recover salary and overseas allowance for the unexpired period of the employment contract, plus general damages for deprivation and frustration of career.
Outcome
Plaintiff awarded special damages of UGX 10,200,000 and USD 102,000, general damages of UGX 4,900,000, with interest at court rate from judgment date and costs of the suit.
Facts
The plaintiff, an Indian national, was employed as Production and Quality Control Manager by Inlex Pharmaceuticals Limited on 4 December 1991, under a five-year contract. The contract entitled her to monthly salary of UGX 200,000 and overseas allowance of USD 2,000, plus fringe benefits including medical treatment, furnished house, car, education allowance for two children, and annual leave with free passage overseas. After working for nine months, she was induced to travel to India. During her absence, Inlex Pharmaceuticals changed its name to Kampala Pharmaceuticals Limited and transferred its shareholding to Dembe Enterprises Limited. Upon her return, she found the factory locked and was unable to resume her duties. The defendant continued paying her hotel bills until May 1992 and she retained use of the company car until December 1994. The defendant alleged she absconded from duty, but the plaintiff maintained she was prevented from working by the change of management. The plaintiff sued for breach of contract after unsuccessful attempts to resume employment.
Issues
- Whether there was a contract of employment between the plaintiff and the defendant.
- Whether the defendant was in breach of that employment contract.
- Whether upon change of name and management, the defendant refused to provide for and facilitate the plaintiff's obligations under the employment contract.
- Whether the defendant was protected by an indemnity agreement with former shareholders.
- Whether the defendant frustrated the plaintiff's career by refusing to discharge her in writing.
- Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies prayed for in the plaint.
Orders
- Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant.
- Special damages of UGX 10,200,000 awarded for loss of salary over 51 months.
- Special damages of USD 102,000 awarded for loss of expatriate allowance over 51 months.
- General damages of UGX 4,900,000 awarded.
- Interest at court rate on special damages from date of judgment until payment in full.
- Interest at court rate on general damages from date of judgment until payment in full.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.