Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

Industrial Court of Uganda

The Industrial Court was established under the Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act, 2006 Cap 224, Laws of Uganda, and section 7.  2006.

The Act was assentenced to on 24th May 2006; and commenced on the 07th August 2006 via a Ministerial statutory instrument.

The Court's jurisdiction ambit are labour disputes referred to it by a party to a dispute where a labour officer has failed to dispose of the dispute within 08 weeks under the court's regulations as requested under the act, disputes referred by the Labour officer at the request of the party or on the officer's own volition when is unable to resolve the dispute; or by responsible Minister on notice of an intended withdrawal of labour within 05 days. Appeals can also be filed against labour officers' decision under the Employment Act. The Court has no original jurisdiction over Labour disputes.

 

Physical address
Plot 25-27, off Martyr's way Ntinda. P.O.Box, 21456 Kampala.
Visit website
https://judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/105//The%20Industrial%20Court.html
7 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
7 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
August 2022
Bog St. Mary's Buwenge v Kayingo and 5 Others (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 81 of 2021) [2022] UGIC 85 (30 August 2022)
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause to set aside ex parte judgment; service found proper and application dismissed.
Civil procedure – setting aside ex parte/default judgment – requirement to show summons not duly served or sufficient cause for non‑appearance; service on firm via lawyer’s receipt – absence of firm stamp not fatal; enlargement of time and leave to file reply – entitlement where sufficient cause shown.
 30 August 2022
Musaasizi v CIPLA / Quality Chemicals Limited (Labour Dispute Reference No. 271 of 2016) [2022] UGIC 20 (30 August 2022)
Judge recused due to prior advocate–client relationship creating a reasonable perception of partiality; file returned for reassignment.
Judicial conduct — Recusal — Prior advocate–client relationship — Perception of impartiality sufficient ground for mandatory recusal under constitutional and judicial conduct principles. Constitutional law — Right to fair hearing — Independent and impartial tribunal — Application of Practice Directions on recusal. Judicial ethics — Bangalore Principles (impartiality) and Uganda Judicial Code of Conduct as guiding authority.
 30 August 2022
NETIS Uganda Limited v Ojom Dinga (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 102 of 2021) [2022] UGIC 86 (30 August 2022)
Court allows late filing of reply despite inadequate COVID‑19 explanation, awarding costs to the respondent.
Labour procedure – extension of time – Rule 6 Labour Disputes (Arbitration & Settlement) (Industrial Court Procedure) Rules 2012 – applicant must show good and sufficient cause – COVID‑19 office closure inadequately particularised – discretion exercised in interest of justice to grant leave – costs to respondent.
 30 August 2022
Smart Choice Health Services v Buzzu (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 16 of 2022) [2022] UGIC 57 (30 August 2022)
Extension of time to appeal refused for lack of good and sufficient cause; execution ordered to proceed.
Employment law – Appeal time limits – Extension of time to file appeal – Applicant must show good and sufficient cause; mistaken advice or delay is insufficient; execution pending appeal may proceed if no sufficient cause shown.
 30 August 2022
Sseyiga and Others v ZTE Uganda Limited (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 21 of 2022) [2022] UGIC 50 (29 August 2022)
Application for review dismissed as an improper appeal; no error apparent on the face of the record.
Civil procedure — Review of court's own decision — limited to errors apparent on face of record or newly discovered evidence; not a substitute for appeal. Distinction between review and appeal — re-appraisal of evidence and misapplication of law are appeal matters, not review grounds. Functus officio — court generally cannot revisit its final judgment. Extension of time — cannot be granted where underlying application is an impermissible review disguised as appeal.
 29 August 2022
Mulema v Stanbic Bank Kampala (Labour Dispute Reference No. 224 of 2018) [2022] UGIC 34 (19 August 2022)
Failure to return after reinstatement constituted voluntary termination, not constructive dismissal, where temporary reassignment did not alter contractual terms.
Labour law – temporary reassignment and fixed-term contract; constructive dismissal – unreasonable employer conduct; mutual separation and withdrawal; failure to return after reinstatement as voluntary termination.
 19 August 2022
Tweyambe v Kampala Capital City Authority (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 21 of 2022) [2022] UGIC 54 (19 August 2022)
Applicant’s attempt to use review to compel discovery and overturn a final pay award was dismissed; remedy lies by appeal.
Administrative/industrial law – Review of Industrial Court award – limited to new and important evidence or error apparent on the face of the record. Civil procedure – Review vs discovery – an application seeking discovery cannot properly be styled as a review to overturn a final decision. Public service/pay claims – requirement to adduce salary structures; duty of due diligence to obtain public salary scales. Functus officio – once judgment rendered, court cannot re-open merits; remedy is appeal.
 19 August 2022