Odikiria v Securex Agencies(U) Limited (Labour Dispute Reference No. 139 of 2017)
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 the claimant was unfairly and unlawfully dismissed. The respondent failed to provide sufficient notice of the disciplinary hearing, gave less than 24 hours to prepare a defence, and did not establish that the claimant committed a fundamental breach of contract. The claimant acted properly by responding to a theft incident at a client's premises when his supervisors were unreachable. The termination was irregular, unfair and unlawful under sections 66, 68 and 69 of the Employment Act. The claimant was awarded payment in lieu of notice, severance allowance and general damages.
Outcome
Claimant's unfair dismissal claim allowed with awards for payment in lieu of notice, severance allowance and general damages
Facts
The claimant was employed by the respondent as a security guard from 2005. On 18 September 2012, he received information that a client's store had been broken into. Unable to reach his supervisors by phone, he left a colleague in the control room and proceeded to the scene with mobile patrol units. He arrested two suspects. Police officers then arrived and arrested the claimant, who was detained and later released without charge while the suspects remained in custody. The claimant was orally summoned on 18 September 2012 to appear before a disciplinary committee on 19 September 2012. On 22 September 2012, he was dismissed for alleged theft, fraud or dishonesty. The respondent alleged he abandoned his duty station and participated in or was believed to have participated in the commission of an offence.
Issues
- Whether the claimant was wrongfully dismissed from work by the respondent.
- Whether the claimant is entitled to the remedies sought.
Orders
- Claim allowed.
- Claimant awarded UGX 760,000 as payment in lieu of notice (2 months at UGX 380,000 per month).
- Claimant awarded UGX 2,660,000 as severance allowance (UGX 380,000 × 7 years).
- Claimant awarded UGX 3,000,000 as general damages.
- Interest of 15% per annum awarded from the date of the Award until payment in full.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (3)
- Benon H. Kanyangoga v Bank of Uganda (Labour Dispute Case No. 080 of 2014)
- Ebiju James v Umeme (High Court Civil Suit No. 133 of 2012)
- Donna Kamuli v DFCU Bank (Labour Dispute Reference No. 002 of 2015)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.