Wakilii

Mary Muhumuza Banyenzaki v Entebbe Handling Services Ltd t a National Aviation Services Ltd (Labour Dispute Reference No. 269 of 2022)

Industrial Court · [2025] UGIC 55 · 2025 Constructive Dismissal Declared AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Labour dispute reference arising from failed mediation before Wakiso District Labour Officer
Decision
Claimant declared constructively dismissed and awarded monetary relief totalling UGX 45,967,872 plus interest and costs

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 claimant was constructively dismissed after the employer held her in an acting position for 27 months without confirmation, failed to communicate transparently about her status, subjected her to an interview for a substantive position, found her unsuitable, and then reverted her to a position that had been abolished. The court found these actions constituted unreasonable conduct amounting to a repudiatory breach of the employment contract. The claimant was awarded unpaid acting allowances, severance pay, general damages, and costs.

Outcome

Claimant declared constructively dismissed and awarded monetary relief totalling UGX 45,967,872 plus interest and costs

Facts

The claimant was employed by the respondent as a Duty Manager in March 2012 and promoted to Deputy Passenger Services Manager in September 2016. In September 2020, following the departure of the Passenger Services Manager, she assumed the role of Acting Passenger Services Manager. Despite repeated inquiries about her status over 14 months, the employer did not respond until December 2021, when it confirmed her acting position. In January 2022, after 27 months in acting capacity, she was interviewed for the substantive position but found unsuitable. The employer then informed her that her former position of Assistant Passenger Services Manager had been abolished and proposed she await appointment as UN Station Manager. She was not paid acting allowances as required by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. She resigned in July 2022, citing an unconducive work environment, unprofessional atmosphere, and failure to provide proper remuneration.

Issues

  1. Whether the Claimant has a cause of action?
  2. Whether the Respondent's actions amounted to constructive dismissal?
  3. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Declaration that the Claimant was constructively dismissed.
  • Respondent to pay UGX 3,668,672 as unpaid acting allowances.
  • Respondent to pay UGX 22,299,200 in severance pay.
  • Respondent to pay UGX 20,000,000 in general damages.
  • Claimant awarded costs of the claim.
  • Interest at 18% per annum on unpaid acting allowances from 25 February 2022 until payment in full.
  • Interest at 13% per annum on severance pay and general damages from date of award until payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Constructive Dismissal — Prolonged Acting Appointment Without Confirmation
Where a Collective Bargaining Agreement provides that no appointment to act in a substantively vacant post shall exceed six months and requires either confirmation or reversion to the former position, holding an employee in acting capacity for 27 months without confirmation constitutes a breach of the employment contract and amounts to unreasonable conduct supporting a finding of constructive dismissal.
Constructive Dismissal — Failure to Communicate
An employer's failure to respond to an employee's repeated inquiries about their employment status over an extended period constitutes unreasonable conduct and an unfair labour practice, as an employee has a right to know their status and employers must communicate openly, transparently, and in a timely manner.
Constructive Dismissal — Abolition of Office and Reversion
Where an employer interviews an employee for a substantive position, finds them unsuitable, and then advises them to revert to their former position which has been unilaterally abolished without evidence of when or how the abolition occurred, such conduct is unreasonable and unfair, constituting a significant breach going to the root of the employment contract.
Collective Bargaining Agreements — Incorporation into Employment Contract
The terms of a Collective Bargaining Agreement are incorporated into an individual employment contract under the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act and give rise to legally enforceable rights, including the right to acting allowances and confirmation procedures.
Acting Allowances — Entitlement and Calculation
An employee serving in an acting capacity is entitled to an acting allowance as stipulated in the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement, and failure to pay such allowances constitutes a basis for a finding of constructive dismissal.
General Damages in Employment Disputes — Assessment Factors
In assessing general damages for constructive dismissal, the court considers the employee's earnings, age, position of responsibility, duration of employment, prospects of securing alternative employment, the manner of termination, and the resulting inconvenience and uncertainty regarding future employment prospects, as well as compensation for emotional distress, mental anguish, and damage to reputation.
Costs in Employment Disputes — Exception to General Rule
While costs in employment disputes do not ordinarily follow the event, an exception applies where the losing party has committed misconduct, including contriving circumstances leading to constructive dismissal and failing to participate in proceedings after initially attending court.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (28)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mary_Muhumuza_Banyenzaki_v_Entebbe_Handling_Services_Ltd_t_a_National_Aviation_Services_Ltd_(Labour_Dispute_Reference_No._269_of_2022)_[2025]_UGIC_55_(18_August_2025)
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.