Wakilii

Jamil Kiseregwa v DHL Supply Chain International Ltd (KCCA-NDC-LC No. 325 of 2018; Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No 293 of 2019; LDR No. 246 of 2019)

Industrial Court · [2026] UGIC 54 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for discovery of documents arising from a labour dispute reference concerning computation of terminal benefits
Decision
Application for discovery granted; Respondent ordered to produce Human Resource Manual and policy documents within 21 working days

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 Respondent must produce its Human Resource Manual and policy documents used in computing the Applicant's terminal benefits. The Court found the documents relevant to the dispute, in the Respondent's possession, and necessary for fair disposal of the matter. The objection to the advocate's affidavit was overruled, applying the principle that an advocate who deposes to an affidavit in a contentious matter is precluded from appearing as counsel but the affidavit itself is not automatically struck out if another advocate appears.

Outcome

Application for discovery granted; Respondent ordered to produce Human Resource Manual and policy documents within 21 working days

Facts

The Applicant, a warehouse controller, worked for the Respondent for 11 years until termination on 31 January 2018. He developed a medical condition allegedly from poor working conditions. Upon termination, he received UGX 1,436,666 in terminal benefits. He complained to the Labour Officer at Nakawa, who adjudicated the matter. The Respondent's response was struck out for failure to produce the Human Resource Manual. The Respondent appealed, and the Applicant filed a labour dispute reference. In its reply to the memorandum of claim, the Respondent stated that benefits were paid in accordance with the Manual but did not produce it. The Applicant applied for discovery of the Manual to determine whether his terminal benefits were correctly computed. The Respondent opposed, arguing the Manual did not exist in the format demanded and that all employment terms were in the employment contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant is entitled to an order for discovery of the Respondent's Human Resource Manual and policy documents used in computing terminal benefits.
  2. Whether the affidavit in reply sworn by Ms. Byarugaba, an advocate conducting the suit, is defective and should be struck out under Regulation 9 of the Advocates (Professional Conduct) Regulations and Order 19 CPR.

Orders

  • The Respondent shall produce its Human Resource Policy or Manual and Policy documents used in the computation of the Applicant's terminal benefits.
  • The documents shall be rendered to the Registrar of the Industrial Court within 21 working days from the date of this order.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Discovery of Documents — Conditions for Grant — Existence of Dispute, Relevance, and Possession
To succeed in an application for discovery of documents, there must be a dispute, the documents must be in the possession of the person against whom the application is made, and the documents must be relevant in the opinion of the Court.
Discovery of Documents — Relevance — Documents Necessary for Fair Disposal
Documents are relevant for discovery purposes where they are necessary for the fair disposal of the matter and tend to prove an element of the claim or defence or to prove or disprove a fact in issue.
Discovery — Human Resource Policies — Computation of Terminal Benefits
Where an employer computes terminal benefits in accordance with a Human Resource Manual or policy documents, those documents are relevant to a dispute concerning the computation of terminal benefits and must be produced on discovery, regardless of the format in which they exist.
Advocates — Professional Conduct — Advocate as Witness — Effect on Affidavit
An advocate who deposes to an affidavit in a contentious matter is precluded from appearing as counsel in that matter or any connected matter, but the affidavit itself is not automatically defective or struck out where another advocate appears on behalf of the party.
Industrial Court — Powers of Discovery — Wide Discretion under Labour Disputes Act
The Industrial Court has a wider berth in discovery proceedings than under the Civil Procedure Rules, empowered by Section 8(2a)(b)(c) of the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act to require any person who appears to have special knowledge of any relevant matter to furnish information, reflecting the unequal nature of the employment relationship and the need for greater judicial oversight.
Discovery — Objectives — Trial Fairness and Efficiency
The objectives of discovery include ascertaining the truth, detecting and exposing sham claims and defences, making difficult facts provable simply, educating the parties about the real values of their cases, expediting litigation, safeguarding against surprise, preventing delay, simplifying and narrowing issues, and expediting trial preparation.
Labour Dispute References — Lower Court Record — Status on Reference to Industrial Court
Where a labour dispute is referred to the Industrial Court by a labour officer, the lower court record becomes part of the record before the Industrial Court and does not cease to be important, as references to the Industrial Court are tried de novo.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (14)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Jamil Kiseregwa v DHL Supply Chain International Ltd (KCCA-NDC-LC No. 325 of 2018; Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No 293 of 2019; LDR No. 246 of 2019) [2026] UGIC 54 (8 June 2026)
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.