Wakilii

Nsasirwe Patience and Others v Kampala International University Teaching And Research Hospital (K.I.U-TH) and Another (Labour Dispute Claim No. LAB 168 of 2021; LABOUR DISPUTE REFE

Industrial Court · [2026] UGIC 08 Preliminary Objection Sustained — Claimants Regularised AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection to joinder of additional claimants in amended memorandum of claim
Decision
Preliminary objection sustained but claimants regularised on record by court order

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 joinder of two additional claimants without a formal application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPR was procedurally defective. However, the Court exercised its discretion under Order 1 Rule 13 CPR to regularise the addition in a summary manner at trial, as the claimants were former parties who had been previously struck off and their re-addition did not prejudice the respondent. The preliminary objection was sustained but the claimants were permitted to remain on record. Costs of the objection were awarded to the respondent.

Outcome

Preliminary objection sustained but claimants regularised on record by court order

Facts

Thirteen claimants filed a labour dispute claim against two respondents. The original memorandum of claim listed 23 claimants. On 23 November 2023, counsel for the claimants sought and obtained leave to strike off eleven claimants, including Nankunda Patience and Kyobusingye Gloria. On 7 October 2025, the claimants filed an amended memorandum of claim which re-introduced Nankunda and Kyobusingye as claimants without filing a formal application for joinder. The respondent raised a preliminary objection on the ground that the joinder was procedurally defective as it was effected without compliance with Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires a formal application or court order for the addition of parties.

Issues

  1. Whether the joinder of additional claimants in the amended memorandum of claim without a formal application or court order is procedurally proper.
  2. Whether the Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to sustain the joinder in the interests of substantive justice.
  3. What is the appropriate remedy where claimants are improperly joined without leave of court.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection sustained.
  • Re-addition of Ms. Nankunda Patience (Claimant No. 13) and Ms. Kyobusingye Gloria (Claimant No. 4) as Claimants regularised by the Court in a summary manner under Order 1 Rule 13 CPR.
  • Costs of the preliminary objection awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Addition of Parties — Requirement for Formal Application or Court Order
The addition of parties to proceedings must be sanctioned by the Court either through a formal application made by a party or through an order made by the Court on its own motion under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Principles Governing Joinder — Necessity Test
A person should only be joined as a party where the orders sought in the suit will legally affect that person or where their presence is necessary to enable the Court to effectively determine the issues in dispute.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Jurisdiction — Limits on Exercise — Cannot Override Clear Procedural Rules
While courts are required to administer substantive justice without undue regard to technicalities under Article 126(2)(e) of the Constitution, inherent jurisdiction cannot be invoked to validate procedural steps taken in disregard of clear and established rules of court.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Summary Addition at Trial — Court's Discretion under Order 1 Rule 13
Order 1 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules permits the Court to add or substitute parties in a summary manner at trial, and the Court has wide discretion to add parties where it is necessary to effectually and completely adjudicate all questions.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Re-addition of Previously Struck-Off Parties — Regularisation by Court
Where claimants who were previously struck off the record are re-added without leave of court, the Court may exercise its discretion under Order 1 Rule 13 CPR to regularise their addition in a summary manner at trial where their re-addition does not prejudice the respondent and judicial economy supports regularisation.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (6)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nsasirwe_Patience_and_Others_v_Kampala_International_University_Teaching_And_Research_Hospital_(K.I.U-TH)_and_Another_(Labour_Dispute_Claim_No._LAB_168_of_2021;_LABOUR_DISPUTE_REFE
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.