[2002] UGHC 25

[2002] UGHC 25

The court held that the plaintiff's employment with Uganda Revenue Authority was effectively terminated when the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces recalled him, regardless of the absence of a formal written notice from the Authority. The recall by the seconding agency rendered the plaintiff unavailable for service to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] UGHC 25
Parties
Plaintiff: Anthony Gatare; Defendant: Uganda Revenue Authority
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CV-CS-0618 of 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Secondment, Termination of Employment, Public Service Employment, Salary Arrears
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Secondment Termination of Employment Public Service Employment Salary Arrears

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Gatare

Plaintiff

Uganda Revenue Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's employment with Uganda Revenue Authority subsisted after his recall by the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to back pay, interest, and damages from Uganda Revenue Authority after his recall.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the plaintiff's employment with Uganda Revenue Authority was effectively terminated when the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces recalled him, regardless of the absence of a formal written notice from the Authority. The recall by the seconding agency rendered the plaintiff unavailable for service to the Authority, and thus he could not claim compensation or remuneration for a period when he was not in a position to render service. Any grievances regarding salary arrears after the recall should be addressed to the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces, not Uganda Revenue Authority. The suit was found to have no merit and was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

suit dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed with costs to the defendant.