|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2005 |
|
|
An informant’s 10% reward under the Finance Act is payable only on tax actually recovered, not merely ascertained or waived.
Revenue law – Informants’ reward under Finance Act s.7 – Reward payable only on tax recovered; agency notice is demand not recovery; Minister’s statutory remission under Income Tax Act lawful without informant notice.
|
27 December 2005 |
|
Whether ostensible authority can transfer ownership where the seller was not the registered owner and remedies for wrongful repossession.
Sale of goods – Nemo dat quod non habet – Ostensible (apparent) authority of agent – Agency by conduct – Transfer of vehicle registration documents – Buyer in good faith – Wrongful repossession – Damages and interest.
|
23 December 2005 |
|
Bank lawfully closed account and returned funds after cheques were materially altered and avoided under Bills of Exchange Act.
Banking law – bank’s right to close accounts where unlawful activity suspected; Bills of Exchange Act s63(1) – material alteration avoids cheque; holder in due course principle; conversion/receipt of fraudulently altered cheque proceeds; recovery on counterclaim.
|
22 December 2005 |
|
A claim on a verbal guarantee is barred unless a written, signed agreement or memorandum of guarantee exists under Section 3(1).
Contract Act s.3(1) — guarantee agreements must be in writing or evidenced by a signed memorandum; pleadings must support reliance on written memorandum; a compromise letter not mentioning personal liability is not a memorandum of guarantee.
|
22 December 2005 |
|
Leave for judicial review refused because a statutory Tax Appeals Tribunal remedy existed and no exceptional circumstances were shown.
* Judicial review – leave to apply – withheld where alternative statutory remedy exists unless exceptional circumstances shown; Tax Appeals Tribunal – statutory review and time limits; arbitrariness/high-handedness – requirement to show decision was capricious; exceptions allowing judicial review include ultra vires, fraud, bias.
|
14 December 2005 |
|
The plaintiff failed to prove the alleged loan balance; suit dismissed with costs and admitted sum deducted.
Commercial law – loan facility and securities; burden of proof on claimant to establish debt on balance of probabilities; inconsistent witness evidence and poor record-keeping undermining claimed balance; waiver/cessation of interest; sale/exchange of secured vehicles and application of proceeds; dismissal for failure to prove amount; costs ordered with admitted sum deducted.
|
12 December 2005 |
|
Plaintiff awarded decretal sum with 30% p.a. interest from filing and costs with post-taxation interest.
* Contract — supply of goods — payment due but unpaid — entitlement to interest on liquidated/decretal sums.
* Interest — discretionary remedy — awardable where claimant deprived of money; authorities: Harbutt’s, Wallersteiner, Sietco.
* Costs — ordinary rule that loser pays; awarded here with interest from date of taxation.
* Frustration — not pleaded; concession of principal by defendant rendered liability for principal conceded.
|
9 December 2005 |
|
Applicant failed to show a triable defence where it had excluded the contested works and acknowledged indebtedness.
Contract – subcontract – variation by main contractor excluding external works – defence of non‑performance defeated by contractor’s own variation letter; debt established by final account and acknowledgements; unparticularised allegations and unsupported owner’s claim cannot defeat payment claim in absence of pleaded counterclaim or evidential link.
|
7 December 2005 |
| November 2005 |
|
|
Seller entitled to unpaid purchase price, damages and interest where buyer defaulted and failed to prove or mitigate defences.
* Sale of goods on credit – recovery of unpaid purchase price; retention of logbook and post-dated cheques as security. * Onus and credibility – defendant’s absence and failure to adduce evidence undermines pleaded defences. * Assessment of damages – mitigation obligation and reduction of speculative loss. * Interest – court discretion to award reasonable commercial rate (24% p.a.). * Costs awarded to successful plaintiff.
|
30 November 2005 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove agreed building-plan terms, defects, encroachment or delay; claim dismissed with costs.
* Contract formation – existence of written agreement in local language; disputed terms.
* Contract breach – requirement to prove existence of specific terms (e.g. building plans, standards).
* Evidence – necessity of adducing expert reports and concrete proof of defects; general allegations insufficient.
* Encroachment/possession – court reliance on independent witnesses; complainant must prove encroachment.
* Prevention and mitigation – party preventing completion cannot attribute non‑completion to other party.
* Remedies – rescission and damages unavailable where breaches not proved.
|
30 November 2005 |
|
Failure to prove a company's existence under the Evidence Act exposes the defendant to personal liability for unpaid MOU fees.
• Contract law – enforcement of Memorandum of Understanding for school fee subsidies – liability for unpaid fees.
• Company law / evidence – requirement to prove corporate existence (s.58 Evidence Act) before relying on separate corporate identity.
• Civil procedure – consequences of failing to substantiate a technical defence and non-attendance at trial; remedies including interest and costs.
|
29 November 2005 |
|
An informal promotion-and-sale contract existed; the defendant must pay the unpaid purchase price with interest and costs.
Contract — oral/informal contract — sale versus promotion — delivery notes and company letter as evidence — breach for non-payment of goods — assessment of special and nominal general damages — interest awarded from date of judgment — counterclaim dismissed for want of prosecution.
|
28 November 2005 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's identity and indebtedness; claim for Shs.5,200,000 dismissed with costs.
Contract/loan recovery – burden of proof; identification of debtor; weight of handwriting evidence; credibility of witness testimony; signature inconsistencies.
|
28 November 2005 |
|
Court dismissed application for leave to appeal, holding respondent raised triable issues requiring a hearing.
* Civil procedure – summary judgment – leave to appear and defend – defendant must show a bona fide triable issue of fact or law.* Holder in due course – presumption of holder for value is rebuttable by evidence of lack of consideration, fraud, illegality, or non-presentation/dishonour.* Appealability – discretionary orders require a stronger showing that grounds merit serious judicial consideration.* Procedural – competence of prior appellate dismissal is for the Appellate Court to determine.
|
27 November 2005 |
|
A shipping contract constituted a bailment and the carrier (bailee) was liable for loss and ordered to pay refund, damages, interest, and costs.
* Contract law – shipment agreement – existence of shipping contract evidenced by invoice and correspondence; * Bailment – carrier as bailee – liability for loss in transit where goods not redelivered; * Damages – special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved (may be proved on balance of probabilities); * Remedies – refund of purchase price or equivalent currency, general damages, interest and costs; * Procedure – consequences of failure to file defence and interlocutory judgment under Order 9 Rule 6.
|
22 November 2005 |
|
Defaulting debtor and guarantor held jointly liable for unpaid loan; court awarded principal, damages, interest and costs.
* Civil procedure – Default judgment – Order 8 r 3 C.P.R.: allegations in plaint taken as admitted where defendant fails to defend.
* Contract law – Loan agreements – Recovery of principal and interest for breach of loan repayment obligations.
* Suretyship – Guarantor held jointly and severally liable for debtor’s default under guarantor’s undertaking.
* Damages – Assessment of general damages for loss of use of money where no figure proposed by plaintiff’s counsel.
* Interest – Award of interest on special damages at commercial rate from filing; interest on general damages at 8% from judgment.
* Costs – Successful plaintiff entitled to costs.
|
9 November 2005 |
|
A defaulting defendant held liable for unpaid loan; plaintiff awarded principal, damages, interest and costs.
* Civil procedure – Default judgment – Order 8 r 3 CPR: allegations in plaint taken as admitted where no defence filed.
* Contract – Breach of contract – assessment of damages – application of Hadley v Baxendale principles.
* Remedies – Decree of principal, award of general damages, commercial interest and costs.
|
9 November 2005 |
| October 2005 |
|
|
Applicants entitled to Shs.2,000,000 monthly arrears for three years; earlier claims time barred, plus interest, damages and costs.
* Limitation – contractual claims against local authorities – three‑year limitation period and effect on instalment rent claims. * Contract formation and proof – documentary acknowledgement plus unchallenged oral evidence establishing agreed monthly remittance. * Remedies – assessment of arrears, interest, general damages and costs where defendant fails to rebut admitted documents.
|
19 October 2005 |
|
Claim for Shs.15,000,000 dismissed because plaintiff failed to prove a contract with the defendant company.
Civil procedure; contract – existence and proof of contract; burden of proof on balance of probabilities; inconsistency between pleadings and oral evidence; company liability versus individual liability; dismissal for failure to establish contractual cause of action.
|
19 October 2005 |
|
Applicant failed to show specific assets or duties warranting an interim liquidator; application dismissed with costs.
Companies law – Interim (provisional) liquidator – Section 238 Companies Act and Rule 27 – Applicant must show assets in jeopardy or public interest and must particularise property and duties sought – Unsupported, open‑ended investigations do not justify provisional appointment.
|
14 October 2005 |
|
Supplier recovered unpaid debt; managing director personally liable under guarantee; deposited drugs were security, not set-off.
Commercial law – Sale on credit – Dishonoured post-dated cheques – Security v. set-off – Mitigation of loss by sale of secured goods – Contractual penalty interest unconscionable; court reduces rate – Personal liability under shareholder’s guarantee – Proof of signature required for liability.
|
13 October 2005 |
|
The applicant’s passing-off claim was dismissed as time-barred for lack of pleaded continuation.
Limitation of actions – Limitation Act s.3 – Passing off is a tort subject to six-year limitation – Continuing tort doctrine requires pleaded facts of continuity – Preliminary objection on limitation may be decided on pleadings when bar is apparent.
|
12 October 2005 |
|
Failure to defend led to constructive admission; plaintiff awarded unpaid fuel debt, general damages, court interest and costs.
* Commercial law – debt for goods supplied on credit – proof by vouchers and financial statements; constructive admission where defendant fails to plead; assessment of special and general damages; refusal of contractual interest for lack of evidence; award of interest at court rate and costs.
|
10 October 2005 |
|
Application for injunction dismissed: wrong statutory basis and no prima facie case or irreparable harm shown.
* Civil procedure – Temporary injunctions – Requirements: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience.
* Order 37 CPR – Rule 1(a) applies to property in danger of waste, damage, alienation or sale; contract interference matters fall under Rule 2(1).
* Injunctions – Illegality alone does not establish a prima facie civil case for interference with contracts; need identification of specific contracts and evidence of interference.
* Evidence – General allegations (e.g., thousands of contracts) insufficient without naming affected parties or showing actual or threatened breaches.
|
4 October 2005 |
| September 2005 |
|
|
Deposit of title creates an equitable mortgage entitling repayment, charge, access and sale if defendants default.
Equitable mortgage — deposit of title as security; Originating summons under Order 34 r.3A CPR for mortgage enforcement; Proof of loan terms and interest accrual; Ex parte hearing after substituted service; Right of charge, access to land and sale by private treaty on default.
|
30 September 2005 |
|
A contractual break clause validly terminated the agreement, but the Town Clerk’s procedurally irregular conduct warranted repayment of an advance; claimed special damages were unproven.
Contract law – break clause – termination by one month’s written notice; Public procurement and corporate governance – applicability of PPDA and Local Government Act to public contract terminations; Procedural irregularity versus unlawful interference; Proof of special damages — requirement of specific, reliable evidence; Restitution of undocumented public advance; Remedies — refusal of declarations/injunction/specific performance, ordering tendering and repayment.
|
30 September 2005 |
|
A defective affidavit failing to distinguish knowledge and belief defeats an application to reinstate closed proceedings.
Civil procedure – Notice of Motion – Order 48 (Motions) vs Order 6 r.1(b) – affidavit sufficiency; Affidavits – must distinguish facts within deponent’s knowledge from matters on information and belief (Order 17 r.3(1)); Defective affidavit fatal to application; Citation of legal provision may be merely technical.
|
30 September 2005 |
|
Vague, unparticularised denials and an unauthorised non‑party affidavit do not raise a triable issue to resist summary judgment.
Summary judgment – application for leave to appear and defend – sufficiency of affidavit to raise triable issue – necessity of particulars under Order 33 Rule 4 – inadmissibility of affidavit by unauthorised non‑party – distinction from Photo Focus decision.
|
28 September 2005 |
|
Court released an attached vehicle after owner proved title and the judgment debtor admitted it belonged to the applicant.
Execution – Attachment of property – Ownership v possession; Attachment of vehicle allegedly used by judgment debtor but owned by third party; Release of attached property where ownership established; Direction for handling of deposited funds; Costs – each party to bear own costs; Right of owner to seek redress against person who handed over the vehicle.
|
28 September 2005 |
|
Advocate’s diary mistake insufficient; applicant must seek leave and show merits to set aside decree.
Civil procedure – setting aside decree under Order 33 Rule 11 – defendant must show reasonable excuse for default and disclose a prima facie defence; simultaneous application for leave to appear and defend is ordinarily required; advocate’s mistake alone insufficient to vacate decree.
|
7 September 2005 |
|
Pre‑incorporation contract and money‑lender illegality raise factual issues; objections overruled and matters ordered for determination on evidence.
Company law – pre‑incorporation contracts – unenforceability by company but subsequent acknowledgement/novation can create independent cause of action; Money Lenders Act – definition of 'money lender' and effect of being unlicensed; Public policy/illegality (ex turpi causa) – fact‑dependent application; Civil procedure – when points of law should be decided or left for evidence.
|
2 September 2005 |
| August 2005 |
|
|
An order setting aside an arbitral award is not appealable under the Civil Procedure Act and no leave lies under the Rules.
Appealability — order setting aside arbitral award — Section 77 Civil Procedure Act excludes such orders; Order XL Rules cannot confer leave for orders not made under Rules; arbitration matters governed by Arbitration and Conciliation Act; authority: Rene Dol; B.D. Bilmoria.
|
31 August 2005 |
|
Applicant shareholder granted joinder to challenge company conversion; non-parties may apply for joinder.
Civil procedure – Joinder of parties under Order 1 Rule 10(2); locus standi of non-parties; proprietary interest shown by share certificate; avoiding multiplicity of proceedings; challenge to company conversion from public to private.
|
31 August 2005 |
|
Application for leave to appeal dismissed as time‑barred under Rule 39(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
* Civil procedure – appeals – leave to appeal – Rule 39(2)(a) Court of Appeal Rules requires application for leave within 14 days or informally at time of decision. * Civil Procedure Act s.80 governs appeals as of right (30 days) and permits appellate court to extend time; not applicable to leave applications. * First instance court lacks jurisdiction to extend time for leave applications governed by Court of Appeal Rules. * Application for leave filed out of time is dismissible with costs.
|
24 August 2005 |
|
Statutory pre‑shipment inspection requirements did not create contractual privity with inspectors; plaint struck out as disclosing no cause of action.
* Civil procedure – striking out plaint – Order 7 r 11(a) – plaint discloses no cause of action.
* Contract law – privity – statutory inspection regime does not create contractual privity between importer and pre‑shipment inspectors.
* Statutory/regulatory obligations – pre‑shipment inspection under Bank of Uganda regime – duties limited to quality/quantity and price comparison; remedies for breach likely in negligence/statutory duty.
* Evidence – survey report attributing damage to containers and transit conditions, not to inspectors’ conduct.
|
19 August 2005 |
|
Forfeiture was unlawful because the Commissioner-General failed to identify an offence, follow statutory procedure, or ascertain value.
Customs law – forfeiture of goods – Section 132(4) does not create an offence – mandatory procedural requirements under Sections 159–162 and Section 174 – compounding offences – evidential burden and value ascertainment – unlawful forfeiture where statutory procedures not followed.
|
1 August 2005 |
| July 2005 |
|
|
Application for leave to defend dismissed for insufficient, untimely affidavits and failure to particularise a triable defence.
Commercial law – leave to appear and defend – Order 33 Rule 4 CPR – requirement to particularise whether defence goes to whole or part of claim; counterclaim/set-off – burden to plead and evidence; loan agreements – interpretation of ‘‘internal transportation’’ and limits of facility; admissibility/timing of affidavits supporting applications.
|
21 July 2005 |
|
Temporary injunction to enforce an exclusive outdoor‑advertising contract refused; damages and status quo concerns prevail.
Interlocutory injunctions — requirements: serious question to be tried, irreparable harm, balance of convenience; Outdoor advertising as protected freedom of speech and expression; exclusivity agreements limiting media use must meet constitutional justification; damages may be adequate remedy; injunction must preserve status quo.
|
20 July 2005 |
|
Taxing master failed to tax the bailiff’s bill; auctioneer not entitled to sale fees where no sale occurred, remit for proper taxation.
• Civil procedure – execution and attachment – conditional stay of execution – expiry of 45‑day period and issuance of fresh execution.
• Court bailiffs/auctioneers – entitlement to fees – no entitlement to sale commission where no sale completed; entitlement limited to reimbursement and remuneration for services under Court Bailiffs Rules (S.I. No.64 of 1987 as amended).
• Taxation procedure – taxing master must tax the bill and issue a certificate of taxation; failure to do so requires remit for proper taxation.
• Possession of certificate of title by judgment creditor does not in itself prevent issuance of execution warrant.
|
14 July 2005 |
|
Order 1 Rule 10(2) permits joinder for complete adjudication but does not allow compulsory substitution of a defendant absent necessity.
Civil procedure – Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPR – misjoinder and non-joinder of parties; joinder by court for effectual adjudication; substitution of defendants; dominus litis; necessity to join party; application dismissed for lack of necessity.
|
14 July 2005 |
|
A secured creditor may enforce its mortgage during voluntary liquidation; the company’s application was procedurally defective and dismissed.
Companies Act s.305 – standing to apply (liquidator/contributory/creditor); secured creditor’s election to stand outside winding up; mortgagee’s right to possession and power of sale in voluntary winding up; mortgagee’s duty to obtain proper price and liability for negligence; distinction between compulsory and voluntary winding up stays.
|
13 July 2005 |
|
Arbitral award set aside for evident partiality and denial of applicant’s opportunity to present key evidence.
Arbitration – setting aside award – evident partiality and denial of opportunity to present case; conflict between conciliation and arbitration; procedural timeliness under s.34(3) ACA; ministerial interference vs corporate autonomy.
|
13 July 2005 |
|
Mortgagee must take reasonable care to obtain market value; bank’s negligent sale reduced recoverable balance to Shs.3,002,572.
Mortgagee’s duty of care in exercise of power of sale; adequacy of advertisement and description; need for re-valuation and competitive sale; measure of recovery for negligence in realising security; application of Cuckmere principles.
|
11 July 2005 |
|
Bank negligent for paying out on a forged cheque; customer entitled to refund, interest and costs.
Banking law – forged cheque; banker’s duty of care – verification where suspicion arises; Bills of Exchange Act s.59 – limits to banker’s protection; employer liability and customer’s own negligence.
|
8 July 2005 |
| June 2005 |
|
|
Plaintiff awarded refund, interest and costs where defendant received payment but wholly failed to deliver motorcycles.
* Contract/Commercial law – advance payment for goods – failure of consideration – money had and received – entitlement to restitution. * Civil procedure – substituted service/default appearance – plaintiff allowed to prove claim in defendant’s absence. * Remedies – award of refund, interest and costs. * Counterclaim – dismissed for lack of evidence.
|
30 June 2005 |
|
Deposit paid to estate agent who absconded does not automatically render vendor liable absent agent's express or implied authority.
Agency law – estate agents’ authority to receive deposits – express or implied authority required; money had and received – recovery from vendor where agent misappropriates deposit; Sorrell v Finch considered.
|
27 June 2005 |
|
The applicant is entitled to contractual VAT reimbursement, interest and damages where the respondent withheld VAT-inclusive payment.
Contract law – VAT in contracts – VAT-inclusive contract price creates right to reimbursement by employer; Tax law – VAT liability of supplier does not preclude contractual reimbursement; Civil procedure – parties bound by their pleadings; unpleaded defences or late evidence disregarded; Interest – contractual clause permitting interest on late payments enforceable.
|
25 June 2005 |
|
Plaintiff had not completed the purchase payments; specific performance and claimed damages were denied and suit dismissed.
Contract – sale of vehicle – completion of payments; Evidence – burden of proof and poor accounting records; Fraud allegation – strict proof required; Equitable relief – specific performance denied where purchaser lacks 'clean hands'; Damages – special damages for loss of use not recoverable where contract payment incomplete; Costs – each party to bear its own costs due to defendants' deficient record-keeping.
|
22 June 2005 |
|
Central bank immunity applies to statutory takeovers unless bad faith is pleaded with sufficient particulars.
* Financial Institutions Statute – Central Bank possession and management – does not automatically create direct liability for a failed institution’s employment contracts. * Civil Procedure – plaint must disclose cause of action – O.7 r.11(a). * Pleading requirements – allegations of bad faith, fraud or willful default must be particularised (O.6 r.2). * Statutory immunity – S.49 protects Central Bank for acts done in good faith; bad faith must be pleaded.
|
21 June 2005 |
|
Court ordered minority shareholder to convene a meeting under s.135 and allowed one‑member quorum due to majority's absence.
* Companies Act s.135 – Court's power to order holding of a meeting where impracticable to convene in prescribed manner – power includes directing one person may constitute quorum.
* Company governance – ultimate control by general meeting vs directors' management powers – intervention where company operates contrary to articles and Act.
* Quorum – single‑member quorum permitted by court order in exceptional circumstances where majority shareholder absent abroad.
|
20 June 2005 |
