By William Madouk
The Juba High Court has set a new cross-examination date for May 15 in the ongoing legal dispute between UAP Insurance Company and a group of dismissed national staff.
Presiding Judge Francis Amum postponed the session last Friday to allow both parties additional time to present evidence concerning alleged staff loans and disputed benefit calculations.
“The court has adjourned the session to allow us to submit our calculations,” said the plaintiff’s attorney, Marko Reech. “If both sides still disagree, the court will make a ruling.”
Reech stated that the Managing Director of UAP has acknowledged elements of unfair dismissal and has already paid six months’ salary to some of the affected employees as part of a settlement.
“There are key admissions from the UAP side confirming unfair termination. That’s why there’s already been compensation for that, in addition to other claims,” Reech said.
He also addressed the contested issue of staff loans, alleging that UAP initially claimed repayment in U.S. dollars but later confirmed the loans were actually in South Sudanese pounds. “That contradiction is why the court asked us to clarify both the loan issue and the benefits calculation,” he explained.
According to Reech, his clients continue to dispute the company’s current calculations of benefits owed. “The figures UAP submitted are not accepted by the former employees, and while we have our own calculations, they weren’t presented in court last time,” he said.
On the issue of discrimination, Reech confirmed that it remains part of the broader case. “We haven’t dropped the discrimination claims. We’re first addressing the contracts and wrongful termination, and then we’ll move on to discrimination, especially against leaders of the staff association,” he added.
The legal battle stems from a wider labor dispute that erupted in October last year when around 70 national staff protested against unequal pay and alleged mistreatment compared to foreign expatriates. The strike brought UAP operations to a halt.
Following the protest, UAP dismissed at least ten employees who were involved in organizing the strike—despite a directive from the Ministry of Labor ordering their reinstatement. In response, the UAP National Staff Association (UNSA) filed a lawsuit against the company.