Justice Anthony Wabwire Musana of the Industrial Division of the High Court has allowed city lawyer Stella Nabbanja Mukwaya Ojinga to continue representing his client in the labour suit against the Registered Trustees of Kampala Archdiocese and St Francis Nsambya Hospital.
The decision resulted from an application filed by the hospital through their lawyers led by Emmanuel Nyanedwoha seeking a Court declaration stopping Nabbanja from representing Julius Ntambazi their former employee citing conflict of interest ground.
Through an evidence affidavit, Dr Andrew Ssekitoleko Muyingo the hospital Chief Executive Officer told Court that before 2018, Nabbanja had served in various fiduciary capacities for the Hospital, including being a Legal Advisor and Chairperson of the Procurement Committee which created an actual conflict of interest.
He further stated that Nabbanja was directly involved in matters central to the dispute, including the formulation of the 2017 Human Resource Manual.
More Read
He added that Nabbanja also participated in Ntambazi’s recruitment and was his supervisor in the records department where he was serving as a record officer before being dismissed on offences related to misconduct.
In her defence, Nabbanja told Court that the conflict-of-interest allegations are baseless noting that it is nine years since she left the hospital and there is no Advocate – Client relationship existing, and no confidential information had been shown to be at risk.
The judge overruled the hospital stating that for their prayer to be proper before court, a formal application against Nabbanja should be filed so that she is given enough time to defend herself not instead of them fixing their prayer in the Res-Judicata application where they wanted Ntambazi’s main case to be dismissed because he earlier withdrew it before it was heard on its merit.
“Against this background, there seems to us to be no logical, legitimate, or justifiable basis upon which to grant this application. It is without merit and stands dismissed with costs to the Respondent because the Respondent has been subjected to defending an application, he was not in a position to answer,” Justice Wabwire together with other panelists who included Adrine Namara, Susan Nabirye and Michael Matovu ruled.
