Wakilii

Makerere University v Kitumba (Labour Dispute Appeal No. 43 of 2015)

Industrial Court · [2021] UGIC 59 · 2021 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from labour officer's decision on complaint of unlawful termination and salary arrears
Decision
Appeal partly allowed. Remedies for unlawful termination set aside. Science money arrears and reduced gratuity award upheld.

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's employment contracts were distinct fixed-term contracts that ended by effluxion of time under Employment Act s.65, not by unlawful termination. The appellant was not obliged to appraise the respondent before deciding not to renew. However, the court upheld the labour officer's finding that the respondent was entitled to science money arrears from December 2012 to 2016, as computer science/information technology staff were classified as scientists from FY 2010/2011. The appeal was partly allowed.

Outcome

Appeal partly allowed. Remedies for unlawful termination set aside. Science money arrears and reduced gratuity award upheld.

Facts

The respondent was employed by Makerere University as Director of Information and Communication Technology Support on a five-year contract from 1 December 2012, renewable subject to satisfactory performance following appraisal. Upon expiry, the contract was extended for three months, then two months until 30 April 2018, with no performance appraisal conducted. When government enhanced salaries for science teachers by 30%, DICTS staff were initially excluded. Following clarification from the Permanent Secretary that computer technology officers are scientists, the appellant paid enhanced salaries from January 2017 but refused to pay arrears for prior years. The respondent claimed science money arrears, accrued gratuity, and challenged the non-renewal of his contract. The appellant advertised the position and appointed another candidate. The labour officer found in favour of the respondent on all claims. The appellant appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether the labour officer failed in law and in fact to properly evaluate evidence on record thereby reaching an erroneous decision.
  2. Whether on the evidence available the labour officer was right to hold that the appellant was in breach of contract by terminating the employment of the respondent.
  3. Whether on the evidence available the labour officer was right to hold the appellant responsible for payment of science salary arrears before January 2017 including gratuity thereon.

Orders

  • The labour officer wrongly held that the respondent terminated the contract and that the termination was in breach of contract.
  • The contracts of the respondent were distinct and separate from each other with definite periods and each of them ended by effluxion of time in accordance with Section 65(1) and (2) of the Employment Act.
  • The holding of the labour officer reflecting remedies of two months' pay in lieu of notice; two months' pay as severance, one month's pay as compensation, one month's pay as additional compensation is hereby set aside.
  • The holding of the labour officer that the respondent is entitled to accrued gratuity is upheld but the amount of gratuity is hereby substituted for UGX 31,828,905.
  • The holding of the labour officer that the respondent was entitled to UGX 90,426,744 as salary arrears (science money) is upheld.
  • The total sum awarded shall carry an interest of 12% per year from the date of this Award until payment in full.
  • No order as to costs is made.

Rules and key headnotes

Fixed-Term Contracts — Termination by Effluxion of Time — No Obligation to Give Notice
Where a contract of service is for a fixed term with a definite expiry date, the contract ends by effluxion of time under Employment Act s.65(1)(b) and (2)(b) without requiring notice of termination or reasons for non-renewal, unless the contract expressly provides otherwise.
Contract Renewal — Appraisal as Condition Precedent — Employer Discretion
A contractual provision that renewal is subject to satisfactory performance following appraisal does not oblige the employer to conduct an appraisal before deciding not to renew. The appraisal is a condition precedent to renewal, not a precondition to non-renewal. Renewal or non-renewal of a fixed-term contract remains in the employer's discretion.
Contract Extension — Successive Fixed-Term Contracts — Distinct Contracts
Where an employer issues successive letters extending an employment contract for definite periods after the expiry of the previous contract, each extension constitutes a distinct and separate fixed-term contract, not a continuous extension of the original contract.
Appraisal Systems — Renewal Without Appraisal — Presumption of Satisfactory Performance
Where an employer renews or extends an employee's contract without subjecting the employee to an appraisal, the presumption is that the employer was satisfied with the employee's performance. The appraisal provision comes into play only where the employer is not satisfied with performance.
Salary Enhancement — Classification as Scientist — Retrospective Application
Where government policy classifies computer science/information technology staff as scientists entitled to enhanced salaries from a specified financial year, and a public institution receives clarification confirming this classification, the institution must effect payment from the date the classification took effect, not from the date of clarification.
Contractual Interpretation — Approbation and Reprobation — Acceptance by Conduct
A party cannot accept and reject the same contractual instrument at the same time. Where an employee continues to perform duties after receiving a letter clarifying or amending contract terms without objection, the employee is deemed to have accepted the amended terms by conduct.
Public Service Circulars — Interpretation — Retrospective Effect
Where a public service circular refers to a salary enhancement from a previous financial year and categorises certain staff as beneficiaries, the entitlement runs from the date specified in the circular, not from the date a subsequent clarification is issued or verification is completed.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (12)

  • Baingana John Paul v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 08 of 2010)
  • Olanya James Otti Tom & 3 Others (HCCA No. 64 of 2017)
  • Zeresire Tereza v Dauda Rwakasenyi & Anor (HCCA No. 50 of 2017)
  • Emau Jimmy & 5 Others v Ketron Development Services Ltd (LDR No. 179 of 2017)
  • Elizabeth Nabatanzi Lugudde Katwe v Attorney General (HCCS No. 279 of 2008)
  • Green Boat Entertainment Ltd v City Council Kampala (HCCS No. 580 of 2003)
  • Action Aids Uganda v David Mbarekye Tibekinga (LDA No. 28 of 2016)
  • Formula Feeds & Amor v KCB Bank Uganda Limited & 2 Others (HCMA No. 208 of 2020)
  • Energo Project Niskogrannja Joint Stock Company v Brigadier Kasirye Gwanga & Commissioner for Land Registration (HCMA No. 186 of 2009)
  • Andrew Kilama Lajul v Uganda Coffee Development Authority & Anor (HCMA No. 270 of 2019)
  • Stephen Semwanga Kavuma v Barclays Bank Uganda Limited (HCMA No. 0634 of 2010)
  • Verschures Creameries Ltd v Hull & Netherlands Steamship Co Ltd [1921] 2 KB

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Makerere_University_v_Kitumba_(Labour_Dispute_Appeal_No._43_of_2015)_[2021]_UGIC_59_(16_July_2021)
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.