Muhwezi-Tindyebwa v Steadfin Uganda Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 286 of 2019)
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 where a cooperative society amalgamates with another to form a new entity during the pendency of litigation, the new entity may be substituted as a party under Order 24 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Section 25(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act provides that a resolution for amalgamation is prima facie evidence that assets and liabilities of the amalgamated societies have been transferred to the new society. The application for substitution was allowed.
Outcome
Respondent substituted as party to the underlying labour dispute; applicant granted leave to amend claim
Facts
The applicant filed a labour dispute (LDR No. 015/2018) against FSN Uganda Co-operative Society Limited. While the matter was pending before the Labour Officer, FSN amalgamated with US Embassy (U) FSN Co-operative to form Steadfin Uganda Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Limited (the respondent). The amalgamation occurred without the applicant's knowledge. The applicant then brought this application seeking to substitute the respondent for FSN in the underlying labour dispute and for leave to amend the claim. The respondent argued that FSN had been wound up and that the applicant should have applied to be on the list of creditors, and that no transfer of liabilities occurred through the merger.
Issues
- Whether Steadfin Uganda SACCO Ltd can be substituted as defendant in Labour Dispute Reference No. 15/2018 by way of amendment.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Applicant to file the necessary amendment within 14 days of the delivery of this ruling.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (4)
- Bhangwan Dass Chopra Vs United Bank of India & Others 1988 AIR 215, 1988 SCR (1) 1088
- Francis Rutagarama Bantariza v Habre Intern Trading Co. Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1999)
- The Trustees of Rubaga Miracle Centre v Mulangira Ssimba (Miscellaneous Application No. 655 of 2005)
- Benjamin Sajjabi t/a Namataba Vs Timber Manufacturers Ltd (1978) HCB 262
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.