Peter Katongole v Airtel Uganda Limited (Arising from KCCA CEN 212 2020; Labour Dispute Reference No. 188 of 2022)
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 a claimant unlawfully dismissed from employment is entitled to general damages for non-pecuniary loss (emotional distress, inconvenience) in addition to statutory compensation, but aggravated damages require proof of malice, callousness, or humiliation. The court awarded UGX 31,030,000 in general damages (equivalent to three months' salary) but denied aggravated damages and costs, finding no misconduct or exceptional circumstances.
Outcome
Claimant awarded general damages for unlawful dismissal; aggravated damages and costs denied
Facts
The Claimant served the Respondent telecommunications company for thirteen years as Revenue Assurance and Fraud Manager. He was dismissed on 6 October 2020 following allegations of failing to detect and report commission fraud. A Labour Officer found the dismissal unlawful and unfair due to procedural defects (inadequate notice, insufficient time to prepare defence, denial of access to investigation reports). The Industrial Court confirmed this finding on appeal in February 2023. The Respondent paid UGX 223,679,286 in terminal benefits, severance, and statutory compensation. The Claimant then filed this reference seeking UGX 3,000,000,000 in general and aggravated damages, alleging reputational harm, financial distress, and humiliating treatment. The Claimant had been a stellar performer with multiple commendations and was subsequently employed by PostBank Uganda Ltd as a Data Warehousing Specialist.
Issues
- Whether the Claimant is entitled to aggravating damages and general damages?
- Whether the Claimant is entitled to costs?
Orders
- The Claimant is awarded UGX 31,030,000 (shillings thirty-one million thirty thousand only) in general damages.
- The claim for aggravated damages is denied.
- The claim for costs is denied.
- Each party shall bear their own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
Cases cited (18)
- Uganda Post Ltd v Consolate Mukadisi (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2022)
- Uganda Development Bank v Florence Mufumba (Court of Appeal No. 241 of 2015)
- Frederick J.K. Zaabwe v Orient Bank (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
- Obongo v Municipal Council Kisumu [1971] EA 91
- Dr. Wenceslaus Rama Makuza v CAA (Labour Dispute Reference No. 041 of 2019)
- Sserunjogi v Guinness Transporters Ltd t/a Safe Boda
- Stanbic Bank (U) Limited v Okou [2023] UGCA 100
- Attorney General of Uganda v Kwesiga Precious [2025] UGCA 321
- Mutwazagye Nicholas v Electoral Commission [2025] UGCA 290
- Standard Chartered Bank v Makoko [2025] UGCA 115
- Airtel Uganda Limited v Katongole
- Aporo v Mercy Corps Uganda
- Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) A.C 562
- Bank of Uganda v Betty Tinkamanyire [2008] UGSC 21
- Ababiku v Ariyo [2017] UGHCEP 2
- Kalule v Deustche Gesellschaft Fuer Internationale Zuzammenarbeit (GIZ) GMBH
- Nganda Joweria v Allen VR Stanley
- Kansiime Nicholas v Kyenjojo
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.