COURT | MUKULA | YONG JIE       

KAMPALA - A Chinese national has withdrawn a sh3.5b suit against Mahathi Infra Uganda Limited, a company owned by Capt. Michael Mukula, after the two parties, reached amicable grounds.

Wang Yong Jie had dragged the company to the Civil Division of the High Court, demanding sh3.5b in compensation over death of her husband. 

She had contended that her 51-year-old husband Ji Zong Wu died due to the alleged negligence of Mahathi Infra Uganda Limited, incorporated in Uganda on May 18, 2015.

Mahathi had been sued together with Mahathi Infra Services PVT Limited and Yandapalli Ravi Shankar. 

The company carries out an EPC business along the shores of Lake Victoria in a project code-named ‘Mahathi Fuel Transport and Storage Depot’.

“By consent of both parties, we hereby agree that the matter be settled amicably,” stated consent of withdrawal filed in court.

The consent was made in the presence of complainant Wang, her Counsel Ivan Okuda, the director of the company Yandapalli Kalyan Swaroop, authorised representatives of Mahathi Infra Services and Diana Kasabiiti, counsel for the defendants.

The matter was settled under terms that the company pays hospital bills for the treatment of Wang’s deceased husband, which she acknowledges as having been settled in full.

The company also footed expenses for the cremation of the deceased’s body in Uganda.

In the consent of withdrawal, it is also indicated that the company paid costs of accommodation and food for the complainant from September 16, 2021 till the date of exit from Uganda.

The company also agreed to pay a flight ticket for the complainant to return to China.     

Court documents indicate that the deceased had been hired by the company as a welding polisher at its ship-building site which was named after the Kabaka of Buganda, Ronald Muwenda Mutebi II at Mulungu landing site. 

Wang however asserted that her husband was trafficked into Uganda by the company under the guise of offering him a lucrative job but ended up causing his death.

“The company, their servants and agents persuaded my husband to leave his duties in Jilin province, Yanji City, China to join Mahathi Fuel Transport and Storage Depot project,” Wang contends. 

She described her husband as a veteran timber mechanist, a reason the company lured him into safe and lucrative employment in Africa due to his expertise but was eventually forced into hazardous employment as a welding polisher on the shipping venture in Uganda without adequate prior training, experience or protective gear. 

“My husband was falsely promised a valid visa, working permit and elite expatriate terms and conditions of service only to be indentured to the defendant’s shipbuilder in Uganda," she contended.

Wang claimed that her husband met his death of failure to seek proper medical treatment. An autopsy report from IHK indicates that the deceased succumbed to autoimmune disease known as septicemia. 

Rebuttal

In rebuttal, the companies through their Counsel Robert Kirunda denied ever employing the deceased, Ji Zhong Wu.  

The companies further denied participating in ‘unlawful’ conspiracy with the purpose of injuring the complainant’s husband and other migrant workers from China, India and elsewhere.

The defendants contended that they entered into valid and legitimate engineering, procurement, construction and financing (EPC+F) contractual arrangements with a Chinese based independent contractor, Jiangsu Pingan Shipping Company Limited.

They say the contractors are directly in charge of the site works relating to the shipbuilding activities on the project site.

The defendant’s lawyers stated that the contractor was free to procure the labour of any person in and from outside Uganda.

“If such labour was procured by the contractor, they retained sole and full legal responsibility for all matters touching those employees, including procuring their legal entry, stay, remuneration, welfare and ultimate exit from Uganda, in compliance with Ugandan laws,” he contended.

“Mahathi Infra Uganda is not responsible for the events that unfolded, resulting from works touching shipbuilding,” he said.

The company denied responsibility for the employment and proximity to the cause of the complainant’s husband’s death.