|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2012 |
|
|
Applicant’s interim injunction against bank collection fees refused for lack of irreparable harm; status quo preserved.
Banking law – collection/‘bank charges’ – legality challenged on basis of lack of privity of contract between depositor and bank. Civil procedure – interlocutory injunction – tests: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience; status quo preservation. Relief – interim injunction refused where loss is monetary and compensable; balance of convenience favours continuation of existing banking practice.
|
28 June 2012 |
|
A taxpayer entitled to a VAT refund by court decision is statutorily entitled to interest under s.44(1), running from collection date until refund month.
Tax law – VAT Act s.44(1) – statutory entitlement to interest on refunds following a court decision; mandatory nature of "shall". Statutory interpretation – where statute silent on period for interest, resort to in pari materia provision (Income Tax Act s.113(4)). Procedural issue – failure to claim interest in original suit does not oust statutory right to interest. Headings/side notes – cannot override clear statutory text.
|
28 June 2012 |
|
Applicant granted unconditional leave to defend where claimed sum was not liquidated and interest application was disputed.
Civil procedure – summary judgment (Order 36) – liquidated demand; disputed interest rate and absence of loan account statement; bona fide triable issues; leave to appear and defend granted.
|
28 June 2012 |
|
A purported plaintiff not incorporated in Uganda cannot maintain suit; misnomer cannot cure a non-existent party.
Company law – capacity to sue – plaintiff must be a legal entity in the forum; misnomer vs substantive defect – non-existent or unregistered entity renders suit a nullity; pleadings – identification of parties essential; striking out plaint for want of legal existence; amendment cannot cure absence of legal personality.
|
27 June 2012 |
|
Contract not frustrated; plaintiff awarded value for 520 tons unpaid, proved special damages, reduced general damages, interest and costs.
Contract law – frustration – temporary unavailability or delay does not frustrate contract where performance remains possible; mitigation and contributory failure – plaintiff’s delay in supplying packing bags reduces general damages; damages – entitlement to pleaded value for undelivered goods and allowance of proved ancillary costs; interest and costs awarded.
|
26 June 2012 |
|
Owner’s failure to repair hired machinery breached the hire agreement; limited damages awarded to both parties.
Contract – Hire of machinery – Verification, servicing and repair obligations – Breach where owner fails to repair machine after renewal of hire; causation of loss where machine’s failure prevents performance of related construction contract; detinue/value claim where hired machine confiscated abroad – quantum limited by proof; interest and costs.
|
26 June 2012 |
|
Plaintiff proved financial mismanagement and breach of duty but failed to strictly prove claimed special damages; dismissals upheld.
Employment law – breach of contract – fiduciary duties of finance staff – proof of fraud in civil cases (heightened standard) – negligence/omission leading to financial mismanagement – summary dismissal for gross misconduct – requirement to strictly prove special damages.
|
25 June 2012 |
|
Challenge to minister’s refusal of NSSF age benefit dismissed; court upheld the gazetted statutory instrument and ministerial decision.
Administrative law – natural justice (audi alteram partem) – adequacy of hearing depends on circumstances; Statutory instruments – publication in Gazette required; published SI authoritative – unpublished drafts not judicially noticed; NSSF Act s.36(2) – reserve account payments require ministerial authorization.
|
25 June 2012 |
|
Whether self‑billed (reverse charge) credits can nullify VAT interest and the Tribunal's failure to remit assessment for statutory recalculation.
VAT law — imported services — reverse charge/self‑billed invoices — regulation 13 VAT Regulations 1996 — sections 25 and 28 VAT Act — timing of review applications — remit to Commissioner for factual recalculation — interest cannot stand if principal is nil.
|
15 June 2012 |
|
Mortgage void for defective execution and no spousal consent; unconscionable moneylender interest; restitution and damages awarded.
Land law – invalid mortgage for lack of company execution and attestation; failure to prove spousal consent; Moneylenders law – unconscionable interest (12% monthly/144% p.a.) reopened and reduced to 25% p.a.; unjust enrichment and restitution; award of return of title, special and general damages, interest and costs.
|
14 June 2012 |
|
Passing off established: similar biscuit packaging caused likely confusion; injunction granted but no damages awarded.
Passing off – goodwill in get-up/packaging – similarity and likelihood of confusion – misrepresentation – lapsed trade mark; injunction remedy where damage not proved; trade practice defence rejected.
|
9 June 2012 |
|
A taxing officer must determine whether a prior payment was full and final settlement before proceeding to tax an advocate's bill.
Advocates Act – taxation of Advocate/Client bill – preliminary issue of whether prior payment was full and final settlement – necessity to frame and decide issues (Order 15, Order 21 CPR) – incomplete record – setting aside taxation and rehearing.
|
8 June 2012 |
|
A valid MOU existed, but the claimant waived breach and failed to mitigate; counterclaim dismissed for lack of proven damages.
Contract law – existence and validity of MOU as a binding agreement; Breach of contract – failure to deposit agreed funds and interference with performance; Waiver and estoppel by election – acceptance of alternative performance bars later claim for repudiation; Mitigation of loss – claimant must take reasonable steps to mitigate; Special damages – must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved; Contingent liabilities – speculative claims based on uncalled guarantees are not recoverable.
|
5 June 2012 |
|
The counterclaimant proved entitlement to a pro‑rata levy; counter‑defendant ordered to pay UGX 298,213,488.
Civil procedure – counterclaim on industry pro‑rata arrangement; burden of proof on balance of probabilities; unchallenged evidence taken as establishing contribution; calculation of levy under agreed conversion factors (1 kg lint = 3 kg seed; bale = 185 kg lint); award of special damages, refusal of general damages for lack of proof; interest and costs awarded.
|
1 June 2012 |
