Ssemwogerere Paul Maziike v Tembo Steels Uganda Limited (Labour Dispute Reference No. 01 of 2025)
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 a casual employee engaged continuously for more than four months automatically becomes an employee entitled to a written contract and benefits under the Employment Act 2006 and Employment Regulations 2011 regulation 39. However, an employee who serves less than six months is not entitled to notice or payment in lieu of notice under section 57(2), and an employee who has not served at least 13 weeks immediately before termination cannot complain of unfair termination under section 70(1). Claim dismissed; court lacks jurisdiction over workers' compensation claims.
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant not entitled to remedies sought
Facts
The claimant, a 6G welder, was hired on 12 September 2023 on a casual basis at UGX 75,000 per day. He worked for six months. He fell ill on 27 January 2024, attributed to lack of protective gear, and was hospitalised. He was discharged on 31 January 2024. He returned to work and worked for 13 days in February 2024 before being told to wait outside on 27 February 2024. The respondent contended the employment was project-based for six months and ended upon project completion; the claimant was asked to wait for alternative employment but refused. The claimant claimed he was employed on permanent terms for a two-year project and was unfairly terminated. He sought declarations, unpaid wages, medical expenses, damages, and interest. The respondent denied termination and stated wages for 13 days remained available for collection.
Issues
- Whether the Claimant was unlawfully or unfairly terminated
- Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought
Orders
- Claim dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (14)
- Employment Act s.2
- Employment Act s.57
- Employment Act s.57(2)
- Employment Act s.64(1)(b)
- Employment Act s.65
- Employment Act s.66(1)
- Employment Act s.67
- Employment Act s.70(1)
- Employment Regulations 2011 reg.28
- Employment Regulations 2011 reg.39
- Employment Regulations 2011 reg.39(1)
- Employment Regulations 2011 reg.39(2)
- Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service, and Virtual Proceedings) Rules 2025 r.46(1)
- Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service, and Virtual Proceedings) Rules 2025 r.46(2)
Cases cited (3)
- Lekya James Napokoli v Mount Meru Millers Uganda Limited (Labour Dispute Reference No. 07 of 2022)
- Ssempijja v D Light Design Ltd
- Stanbic Bank v Deopgratious Asiimwe (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2018)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.