Kikomeko & 18 Ors v Kibuli Girls High School Limited (Civil Suit No. 0108 of 2009)
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 High Court struck out the suit on preliminary objection, holding that the plaint disclosed no cause of action. The pleadings failed to particularise dates of employment, termination, the nature of contracts, or who terminated them. The plaint was internally contradictory, listing 19 plaintiffs in some paragraphs and only 9 in others. Further, the plaintiffs lacked locus standi to claim NSSF remittances, as such proceedings must be instituted by an Inspector or public officer of the fund under sections 46 and 47 of the NSSF Act.
Outcome
Suit struck out on preliminary objection
Facts
Nineteen plaintiffs, former or current teachers at Kibuli Girls High School Limited, sued for wrongful dismissal, unpaid salary arrears, terminal benefits, and unremitted NSSF contributions. The plaint listed employment months and years but did not specify contract start or termination dates, nor attach any employment contracts. The defendant raised a preliminary objection that the plaint disclosed no cause of action. The defendant also counterclaimed against two plaintiffs for allegedly stolen textbooks worth UGX 6,000,000.
Issues
- Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action against the defendant.
- Whether the plaintiffs have locus standi to claim NSSF remittances on behalf of the National Social Security Fund.
Orders
- Preliminary objection upheld.
- Plaint struck out.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (1)
- Auto Garage & Another v Motokov (No.3) [1971] EA 514
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.