Wakilii

Hima Cement Limited v Uganda Building Construction Civil, Engineering ,Cement and Allied Workers Union (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No. 1 of 2020)

Industrial Court · [2020] UGIC 44 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to strike out memorandum of claim and refer matter back to Labour Officer for non-compliance with Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act procedure
Decision
Application dismissed; main labour dispute to proceed before the Industrial Court

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 a Labour Officer may refer a labour dispute to the Industrial Court without strictly following the conciliation procedure under sections 4(a), (c) and 5(1) of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006 where a point of law arises from the materials before the Labour Officer which he or she cannot resolve. The application to strike out the claim was dismissed.

Outcome

Application dismissed; main labour dispute to proceed before the Industrial Court

Facts

The Respondent union notified the Applicant employer that nine employees had enrolled with the union and requested remittance of union dues. The Applicant refused, asserting the employees were not eligible under a memorandum of agreement. The Respondent reported the dispute to the Labour Officer in Kasese District. The Labour Officer notified the Applicant by email through its Human Resources Officer, who acknowledged receipt and stated a similar complaint had been filed with the Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development. The Labour Officer then referred the matter to the Industrial Court on the basis that it raised a point of law. The Applicant brought this application to strike out the claim, arguing the Labour Officer failed to follow mandatory conciliation procedures under the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006 before making the reference.

Issues

  1. Whether the reference to the Industrial Court was competent where the Labour Officer did not follow the procedure under sections 4(a), (c) and 5(1) of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Employment & Labour — Labour Disputes — Reference to Industrial Court — Jurisdiction
The Industrial Court is a court of reference and disputes can only be referred to it in accordance with the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006. Jurisdiction is the foundation upon which the judicial process is constructed, and without jurisdiction a court cannot hear and dispose of a case.
Employment & Labour — Labour Disputes — Labour Officer's Duties — Conciliation Procedure
Under section 4 of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006, a Labour Officer is required to handle a complaint within two weeks of receiving it by meeting with parties to conciliate, appointing a conciliator, referring the dispute back to parties with proposals, rejecting the report, or informing parties that the report comprises matters which cannot be dealt with under the Act.
Employment & Labour — Labour Disputes — Reference to Industrial Court — Exception to Mandatory Procedure
A Labour Officer may refer a labour dispute to the Industrial Court without following the mandatory conciliation procedure under sections 4(a), (c) and 5(1) of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006 where the Labour Officer believes that a question of law or fact arises from the materials before him or her which he or she cannot resolve. The reference may be made solely based on the materials upon which the parties expressed themselves in their pleadings.
Employment & Labour — Labour Disputes — Labour Officer's Competence — Legal Questions
Most Labour Officers are not lawyers or are not conversant with the law and may not be able to handle certain complaints involving substantial questions of law. Section 4(e) of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act 2006 allows a Labour Officer to inform parties that a report comprises matters which cannot be dealt with under the Act, which may include situations where questions of law arise that the Labour Officer cannot handle.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (2)

  • Attorney General of the Republic of Tanzania v African Network for Animal Welfare (East African Court of Justice Appeal No. 2011)
  • Eng. Eric Mugenyi v Uganda Electricity Generation Company Limited (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 157 of 2018)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hima_Cement_Limited_v_Uganda_Building_Construction_Civil,_Engineering_,Cement_and_Allied_Workers_Union_(Labour_Dispute_Miscellaneous_Application_No._1_of_2020)_[2020]_UGIC_44_(17_D
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.