Uganda Case Law

Wanyoto Cabot Desderious v Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (Labour Dispute Appeal 17 of 2021)

Wanyoto Cabot Desderious v Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (Labour Dispute Appeal 17 of 2021) [2025] UGIC 17 (7 March 2025)

Court

Industrial Court of Uganda

Case number

Labour Dispute Appeal 17 of 2021

Judges

Wabwire Musana, J, Musimbi, Panel Member, Bigirimana penal member, Lapenga

The court found that the restructuring exercise, including the compression of salary grades and placement of the appellant in grade 10, was lawful, organization-wide, and did not target the appellant individually. The evidence showed that the appellant's salary was enhanced, not diminished, and that all staff were affected equally by the restructuring. The appellant failed to demonstrate discrimination based on any protected attribute under Article 21 of the Constitution or Section 5 of the Employment Act. The Labour Officer properly evaluated the evidence and law, and there was no basis for…

Source excerpt

• Workplace Restructuring
• Salary Grading
• Discrimination In Employment
• Terminal Benefits Computation
• Retrospective Salary Enhancement

Lwetabe and 4 Others v Attorney General and 2 Others

Lwetabe and 4 Others v Attorney General and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 165 of 2020) [2021] UGHCCD 91 (6 August 2021)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 165 of 2020

Judge

Musa Ssekaana, J

The High Court held that UEB employment ended on 30 March 2001 for benefit calculations, so terminal entitlements must be computed only up to that statutory transfer date.

• Consent Judgment Enforcement
• Terminal Benefits Computation
• Employment Termination Date
• Successor Company Liabilities
• Employment-termination
• Terminal-benefits

Othieno Andrew v National Water & Sewerage Corporation

Othieno Andrew v National Water & Sewerage Corporation (Civil Appeal No 67 of 2002) [2005] UGCA 92 (1 January 2005)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No 67 of 2002

Judge

Okello, JA, Mpagi-Bahigeine, JA, Engwau, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the period during which the appellant was laid off (June 1994 to June 1999) could not be considered as part of his continuous service for the purposes of salary arrears or computation of retirement benefits. The appellant was not reinstated but re-engaged under a new contract, and thus was not entitled to salary for the period his employment was terminated. The authorities cited by the appellant were found not to be applicable as they were not statutes of general application or principles of common law. The court affirmed that the proper remedy for wrongful termi…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Termination
• Re Engagement Vs Reinstatement
• Terminal Benefits Computation
• Salary Arrears
• Counter Claims
• Damages For Wrongful Dismissal