Unlawful Or Unfair Dismissal

Reuben Kajwarire v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 214 Of 2005) ((Civil Suit No. 214 Of 2005)) [2009] UGHC 127 (27 June 2009);


Search Summary: 

The plaintiff’s claim against the defendant was for a declaration that he is entitled to pension, an order that he be paid his pension dues and arrears since March 1993; interest on the pension arrears from the date of termination till payment in full and interest on the aggregate sum from the date of filing the suit till judgment.  He also prays for the costs of the suit.

Court held that there was no evidence that the retrenchment came at a time when the plaintiff’s probationary appointment was under review, to raise inference that the probation period had been extended for any valid reason.  Court was aware that confirmation in Civil Service is dependent upon the employee’s performance and that this is assessed through confidential appraisals.  A probationary employee is one whose employment may or may not be confirmed after a specified period.  If the employee does not show suitability for the job, he/she may not be confirmed in service.  This implied that to be denied confirmation, the employee must of necessity show non-suitability for the job.


In the instant case, the plaintiff joined service on September 15th, 1978.  He was shown the exit on March 23rd, 1993, after a period of 15 years in service.  No evidence had been presented to court of any wilful default on his part to warrant non-confirmation in the service of the defendant. Court of the considered opinion that the plaintiff became a permanent employee of the defendant upon the lapse of the two year period.


Headnote and Holding: 

Court further held that the evidence did not dispute the fact of the plaintiff’s employment relationship with the defendant.  His evidence was that he was not paid pension because of certain formalities which Public Service Commission was still working on retrospectively, implying that once those formalities are completed, he will be paid his pension.  The fact remained that he was a pensionable officer.


In the result, judgment was entered for the plaintiff against the defendant on the following terms:


  • Declaration that he is entitled to pension.


  • An order that he be paid his pension dues and arrears since March 26th, 1993.


  • Shs.2,000,000/= as general damages.


  • Interest on the pension arrears from the date of retrenchment till payment in full at the rate of 24% per annum and 20% on the aggregate sum from the date of filing the suit till judgment.


  • Costs of the suit.



Subscribe to RSS - Unlawful Or Unfair Dismissal