Uganda Post Limited v Mukadisi (Civil Appeal 251 of 2018)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against the quantum of general damages awarded for unlawful termination of employment. It reaffirmed that an appellate court will not interfere with a trial court's assessment of damages unless the court acted on a wrong principle of law or the amount is so high or so low as to make it an entirely erroneous estimate. Finding the termination unlawful and marred by breaches of natural justice, the Court held the trial Judge had exercised his discretion judiciously in awarding UGX 150,000,000, and found no basis to disturb the award. The appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondent in both courts.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; the trial Judge's award of UGX 150,000,000 general damages and other orders upheld

Facts

The respondent was appointed on probation as Head of Human Resource Department with the appellant company for four years from 20 July 2009, and was later confirmed in that position. In August 2011, she was instructed to take forced leave to allow investigation of complaints of discrimination, use of unacceptable language and professional misconduct made against her by a co-worker. After she protested, the forced leave decision was withdrawn. She was then invited to defend herself before the appellant's Board Meeting, following which her employment was terminated with immediate effect. The respondent contended the termination was unlawful and that the Board's disciplinary process contravened the rules of natural justice. The High Court found the termination unlawful and awarded her general damages of UGX 150,000,000, terminal benefits, severance allowance, interest and costs. The appellant appealed only against the general damages award, contending it was manifestly excessive.

Issues

1. Whether the trial Judge's award of UGX 150,000,000 as general damages for unlawful termination was manifestly excessive so as to warrant interference by the appellate court.

Orders

• The appeal is dismissed.
• The judgment and orders of the trial Judge are upheld.
• The respondent is awarded costs in this Court and in the Court below.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Court of Appeal Rules r.30(1)

Cases cited (10)

• Flint v Lovell [1935] 1 KB 360
• Makula International Ltd v His Eminence Cardinal Emmanuel Nsubuga (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
• Obongo v Municipal Council of Kisumu [1971] EA 91
• Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
• Storms v Hutchinson [1905] AC 515
• Robert Coussens v Attorney General (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1999)
• Uganda Commercial Bank v Deo Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
• Kibimba Rice Ltd v Umar Salim (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1992)
• Bank of Uganda v Betty Tinkamanyire (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2007)
• Agbettah V Ghana Cocoa Marketing Board (1984-86) GLRD 16

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Tumshabe v Normandy Company (Labour Dispute Reference 28 of 2023)

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