The Industrial Court has granted Uganda Martyrs University a conditional stay of execution in a labour dispute with former lecturer George Goldie Aporu, temporarily halting enforcement of a Shs28.8 million award while the university pursues an appeal.
In a ruling delivered on June 30, Justice Anthony Wabwire Musana, sitting with panellists Can Amos Lapenga, Emmanuel Bigirimana and Adrine Namara, held that the university had raised arguable legal issues deserving consideration on appeal, particularly over whether the Labour Officer had jurisdiction to determine the dispute.
The case stems from a decision by the Labour Officer in April 2024 awarding Aporu Shs28.815 million after finding that the university had failed to pay him wages for services rendered as a lecturer between 2021 and 2023.
Following the award, Aporu initiated execution proceedings after the university failed to satisfy the judgment or challenge it within the prescribed time. Court records show that a warrant of attachment was issued, leading to the attachment of one of the university’s buses used to transport staff.
The university subsequently sought a stay of execution, arguing that it intended to appeal the Labour Officer’s decision and had also applied for an extension of time to file its notice of appeal.
Through its Acting Human Resource Director, Josephine Namugumya, the university argued that Aporu had already received all his entitlements and that enforcing the award would result in double recovery. It further contended that Aporu was engaged under a consultancy arrangement rather than an employment contract, meaning the Labour Officer lacked jurisdiction to determine the dispute.
The university also maintained that the attachment of its staff bus was disrupting its operations and that execution before the appeal was heard would render the intended appeal meaningless.
Aporu opposed the application, describing it as an attempt to frustrate execution of a lawful award. He argued that he was a bona fide employee of the university and that it had failed to participate in the proceedings before the Labour Officer despite being notified.
He further contended that the university had delayed challenging the award for more than 500 days and only acted after execution proceedings had commenced. He also argued that the matter had already been determined in an earlier application for stay of execution and was therefore barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
However, the Industrial Court rejected that argument, holding that although the university had previously sought a stay, the present application was based on its intention to appeal and its pending application for extension of time to file the appeal.
The judges found that the new application raised issues that had not previously been determined and could not therefore be dismissed as res judicata.
On the merits of the application, the court noted that the university’s challenge to the Labour Officer’s jurisdiction constituted a fundamental legal question with a reasonable probability of success.
“The jurisdictional challenge raised by the Applicant means the intended appeal is not entirely frivolous,” the court observed.
The judges acknowledged that the university had delayed significantly in seeking relief but accepted its explanation that it had initially pursued a different legal strategy before deciding to appeal.
The court also found that although the underlying decree was purely monetary and therefore refundable if the appeal succeeded, it was necessary to preserve the university’s right to appeal while safeguarding Aporu’s entitlement to the fruits of his judgment.
To strike that balance, the court ordered the university to deposit Shs14,907,500, representing half of the decretal amount, in the court registry within 14 days.
The stay of execution will only take effect after the deposit is made. Should the university fail to comply within the prescribed period, the stay will automatically lapse and Aporu will be free to resume execution proceedings.
The court further ordered that the costs of the application will abide by the outcome of the intended appeal.
English 