Wakilii

Nottidge and Another v Sandalo (Revision Case 113-1927.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1927] EACA 34 · 1927 Conviction Quashed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal revision from magistrate's conviction under Employment of Natives Ordinance
Decision
Accused released following quashing of conviction

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

Held that an advance of wages cannot be split up into component parts for the purpose of bringing a prosecution within section 53 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance. The sum must be looked at as a whole and where it clearly does not constitute an advance on account of a current contract, the provision does not apply. Furthermore, rescission of the contract on the grant of leave relegates the employer to a civil action for recovery.

Outcome

Accused released following quashing of conviction

Facts

The accused was employed under a thirty-day contract. He fell ill for twenty-one days and was thereafter granted leave. The employer advanced Sh. 79 to the accused, made up of amounts advanced from time to time during the employment. The accused left service before working off the advance. The employer prosecuted the accused under section 53 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139) for leaving service before working off an advance of wages. The magistrate convicted the accused, taking the view that the total sum could be split up into component advances for the purpose of bringing the case within section 53.

Issues

  1. Whether an advance of wages totalling Sh. 79, made up of amounts advanced from time to time, can be split up for the purpose of bringing the case within section 53 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance.
  2. Whether the rescission of the employment contract on the grant of leave relegates the employer to a civil action for recovery of sums owing.

Orders

  • Convictions quashed.
  • Consequential orders quashed.
  • Accused ordered to be released.

Rules and key headnotes

Employment of Natives Ordinance — Penalty for leaving service — Advance of wages
An advance of wages made up of multiple amounts advanced from time to time cannot be split up for the purpose of bringing a prosecution within section 53 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance; the sum must be looked at as a whole.
Employment of Natives Ordinance — Rescission of contract — Effect on employer's remedies
Where an employment contract is rescinded on the grant of leave to the employee, the employer is relegated to a civil action for the recovery of any sum owing by the former servant and cannot pursue a criminal prosecution under section 53.
Employment of Natives Ordinance — Section 53 — Advance on account of current contract
Section 53 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance applies only to advances on account of a current contract; where the sum advanced is clearly not such an advance, the provision does not apply.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139) s.53

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nottidge and Another v Sandalo (Revision Case 113-1927.) [1927] EACA 34 (1 January 1927)
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.