The Industrial Court has maintained that Crown Beverages, the makers of Pepsi, must pay two former employees more than Shs622 million after it fired them unlawfully over a dispute that began with a staff wedding.
Ketra Aguti and Dickson Asiimwe were dismissed in July 2020 after the company accused them of collecting money from its suppliers for a colleague’s wedding.
They took the company to court, and in February 2023, it ruled that their dismissals were unlawful and ordered that they be paid Shs 622 million. But Crown Beverages fought back.
Here is the background to the story.
In 2019, Philip Oucur, Crown’s head of sales, who had worked there since 2009, decided to marry. He told the chief executive, Paddy Muramiirah, and asked for support. It was the custom for staff to invite colleagues, contract distributors and suppliers to their weddings.
A wedding launch planned for the Sheraton Hotel on April 17, 2020 was cancelled when the Covid-19 lockdown began.
Oucur instead designed an electronic invitation card carrying bank account details, so well-wishers could send contributions.
Aguti and Asiimwe sat on the wedding committee and were signatories to the account. They said only four of about 150 suppliers were invited.
In June 2020, the chief executive questioned Aguti and Asiimwe about inviting other suppliers to the wedding, saying it was against company policy.
To their shock, they were suspended, and on June 29, they were summoned before a disciplinary committee. Ten days later, they were dismissed.
Crown Beverages case was that the two had forced or intimidated distributors and suppliers into paying “not less than” Shs1 million each.
Asiimwe, then head of procurement and stores, was accused of using his office to push a supplier to deposit money.
The company said this broke four staff rules: harming its good name, demanding payments or bribes, private pursuits conflicting with its interests, and gross abuse of office.
It also said Aguti refused to produce the account statement. She was paid three months’ salary in lieu of notice because of her good record. Asiimwe was dismissed immediately.
The Industrial Court did not accept this and said that the suspension was “an indefinite one contrary to Section 63 of the Employment Act”, which allows suspension on half pay for no more than four weeks.
It also found no evidence of the names or descriptions of the suppliers said to have been coerced, and no complaint from any of them.
The court noted that Muramiirah, the chief executive, himself had contributed Shs 1.5 million to Oucur’s wedding.
The court said Aguti and Asiimwe were not accorded a fair hearing and concluded that they were unlawfully discharged.
It ordered Crown Beverages to repay their outstanding salary loans, which were Shs91.7 million for Aguti and Shs106 million for Asiimwe, plus interest. It awarded general damages of Shs105.6 million to Aguti and Shs350 million to Asiimwe.
After the award, Aguti’s lawyers sent a draft decree on March 3, 2023, spelling out what the court ordered. The company did not approve it, saying its lawyer, Oscar Kihika, was unavailable.
Instead, it filed a notice of appeal in the Industrial Court and, on March 7, 2023, applied for a stay of execution, which freezes payment while an appeal is pending.
Crown Beverages was represented by Elbert Byenkya and Anthony Bazira of Byenkya, Kihika & Co. Advocates.
They said if the company went ahead to pay the money, it faced “irreparable financial loss”. They offered a bank guarantee of Shs200 million.
Aguti called the appeal baseless and misconceived, while Asiimwe said he has no job or income, and that a stay would be unjust, unfair, inequitable, and greatly prejudicial to him.
Their lawyer, Brian Emurwon of Emurwon & Partners, said Crown Beverages had not proved substantial loss.
Court orders NWSC to pay Shs 39.7m interest to supplier it only paid after being sued
Justice Linda Lillian Tumusiime-Mugisha found two problems with Crown Beverages’ appeal.
The first was that there was no evidence that the notice of appeal was filed with the Court of Appeal registries, and the second was that it had ignored the draft decree, saying it was not valid.
“It is glaringly clear that [Crown Beverages], having omitted an essential step in preparing the extraction of the decree by failing to approve the draft decree, had no decree upon which to base an appeal,” she said.
Justice Tumusiime-Mugisha said Crown Beverages had acted in haste in bringing this application for stay of execution of proceedings which have not yet commenced.
“The application is premature before this court,” she ruled.
This means that Aguti and Asiimwe keep their award of Shs622 million, and Crown Beverages must pay the costs for this application.
