Wakilii

Okello v Entebbe Handling Services Limited (Labour Dispute Claim 200 of 2014)

Industrial Court · [2020] UGIC 19 · 2020 Judgment for Claimant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Labour dispute claim arising from wrongful termination of employment
Decision
Claimant's employment declared wrongfully terminated; monetary awards and certificate of service ordered in claimant's favour

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 termination of employment on grounds of loss of trust without affording the employee a fair hearing as required by Employment Act sections 66 and 68 and Constitution Article 28 is wrongful and unlawful. An employer's contractual right to terminate cannot override statutory procedural safeguards. The claimant was awarded damages including salary in lieu of notice, severance pay, untaken leave, general damages, and costs.

Outcome

Claimant's employment declared wrongfully terminated; monetary awards and certificate of service ordered in claimant's favour

Facts

The claimant was employed by the respondent as a security warden on 9 March 2009. On 11 September 2013, she was terminated on grounds of loss of trust arising from allegations that she verified documents of two Indian passengers who travelled using counterfeit UK visas on 10 August 2013. The claimant denied the allegations and stated that she had referred the passengers to the airline supervisor for final clearance after finding the documents in order. She testified that she was called to the CEO's office and informed she was fraudulent and terminated, without being afforded a proper disciplinary hearing. The respondent listed three witnesses but produced none at trial despite multiple adjournments over four years.

Issues

  1. Whether the claimant's employment was wrongfully or unjustifiably terminated.
  2. Whether the claimant was entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • The claimant's employment was wrongfully, unjustifiably and unlawfully terminated.
  • The claimant shall be paid UGX 408,000 as salary for the month of September 2013.
  • The claimant shall be paid UGX 816,000 as payment in lieu of notice.
  • The claimant is not entitled to repatriation allowance.
  • The claimant shall be entitled to UGX 22,074,741 as 50% of payment of basic pay for 4 years.
  • The claimant shall be entitled to a certificate of service in accordance with Section 61 of the Employment Act.
  • The claimant shall be entitled to UGX 20,000,000 as general damages.
  • The claimant shall be entitled to UGX 1,042,364 in untaken leave.
  • Costs incurred by the claimant shall be payable by the respondent.
  • The amounts in orders 2, 3, 5, 7 and 8 shall carry an interest rate of 15% per year till payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Employment & Labour — Termination of Employment — Procedural Requirements — Fair Hearing
Although an employer has a contractual right to terminate employment, such termination must conform to the procedural requirements of sections 66 and 68 of the Employment Act, which require that an employee accused of misconduct be given charges, sufficient time to respond, and an opportunity to appear before an impartial tribunal.
Employment & Labour — Termination of Employment — Loss of Trust — Evidentiary Burden
Where an employer terminates employment on grounds of loss of trust arising from alleged employee misconduct, the employer must adduce evidence that the conduct complained of actually occurred and that it eroded trust and confidence. In the absence of such evidence, termination on this ground is wrongful.
Employment & Labour — Disciplinary Hearings — Minimum Standards of Natural Justice
A disciplinary hearing need not meet the standards of a court of law, but it must apply the minimum standards of natural justice envisaged under Article 28 of the Constitution: the employee is entitled to details and particulars of the offence, ample time to prepare a defence, and an opportunity to appear before an impartial tribunal.
Employment & Labour — Termination of Employment — ILO Convention No. 158 — Application in Uganda
Sections 66 and 68 of the Employment Act are a replica of Articles 4 and 7 of ILO Convention No. 158 on termination of employment, which was ratified by Uganda on 18 October 1990. A contractual provision permitting termination cannot override these statutory and international obligations.
Employment & Labour — Repatriation — Circumstances Entitling Employee to Repatriation
Under section 39 of the Employment Act, an employee recruited more than 100 kilometres from home is entitled to repatriation at the employer's expense only in specified circumstances: expiry of contract, termination by reason of sickness or accident, termination by agreement, or termination by court or labour officer order. Termination by the employer before contract expiry does not fall within these circumstances.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Wrongful Termination — Assessment
General damages for wrongful termination are intended to place the aggrieved employee in the position they would have occupied but for the unlawful termination. Where an employee was on an open-ended contract and had a career rudely interrupted, an award of UGX 20,000,000 in general damages is not unreasonable.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (6)

  • Hilda Musinguzi v Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 05 of 2015)
  • Barclays Bank Uganda v Godfrey Mubiru (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 01 of 1998)
  • DFCU v Donna Kamuli (Court of Appeal No. 121 of 2016)
  • Caroline Karrisa Gumisiriza v Hima Cement Limited (High Court Civil Suit No. 84 of 2015)
  • Ebiju James v Umeme Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 133 of 2012)
  • Nalukenge Mariam v Tropical Bank Limited (Labour Dispute Reference No. 238 of 2017)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Okello_v_Entebbe_Handling_Services_Limited_(Labour_Dispute_Claim_200_of_2014)_[2020]_UGIC_19_(14_August_2020)
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.