Wakilii

Agnes Kabalisa v Sanyu Patrick and Another (Civil Suit N0. 381 of 2017)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 173 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract and refund of purchase price
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with orders for refund, damages, interest, and costs

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that the defendants breached a land sale agreement by failing to deliver vacant possession due to third-party claims and further breached subsequent refund agreements. The plaintiff was entitled to rescind the sale agreement and recover the purchase price. The court ordered refund of UGX 68,000,000 with commercial interest at 16% per annum from judgment, general damages of UGX 30,000,000 with court interest at 6% per annum, and costs to the plaintiff.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with orders for refund, damages, interest, and costs

Facts

On 9 August 2016, the plaintiff and defendants entered into a land sale agreement for land in Kyakwanzi District for UGX 70,000,000. The plaintiff paid the full purchase price. The defendants represented that the land was free of squatters and competing claims. Upon taking possession, the plaintiff discovered third parties claiming interest in the land. The defendants failed to deliver vacant possession. The parties entered into refund agreements on 5 January 2017 whereby the defendants agreed to refund UGX 70,000,000. The defendants paid only UGX 2,000,000, leaving a balance of UGX 68,000,000 outstanding. Despite several demands, the defendants refused to refund the balance. The 1st defendant filed a defence but neither defendant complied with court directions to file witness statements or attend trial. The court proceeded ex parte under Order 9 rule 20.

Issues

  1. Whether the Defendants breached the contract with the Plaintiff?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The defendants are in breach of the contract they entered into with the plaintiff.
  • The defendants shall refund the sum of UGX 68,000,000 (Uganda Shillings Sixty Eight Million) to the plaintiff.
  • The defendants shall pay interest at the commercial rate of 16% on the refund amount from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • The defendants shall compensate the plaintiff with general damages of UGX 30,000,000 (Uganda Shillings Thirty Million) for the inconveniences she has suffered due to the defendants' actions.
  • The defendants shall pay interest at the court rate of 6% on the general damages from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • The defendants shall pay the costs for the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Failure to Deliver Vacant Possession
Where a vendor fails to deliver vacant possession of land free from third-party claims as required by the sale agreement, the vendor is in fundamental breach of contract entitling the purchaser to rescind the agreement and seek a refund of the purchase price.
Contract Law — Refund Agreements — Breach by Non-Payment
Where parties enter into a refund agreement following rescission of a sale agreement and the obligor fails to refund the agreed sum by the stipulated date, the obligor is in breach of the refund agreement.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment for Breach of Contract
In assessing general damages for breach of contract, the court is guided by the value of the subject matter, the economic inconvenience suffered by the aggrieved party, and the nature and extent of the breach. Where a defendant has withheld the plaintiff's money for nine years without consideration, an award of UGX 30,000,000 in general damages is reasonable.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Commercial Rate in Commercial Transactions
In commercial transactions, interest on money wrongfully withheld should be awarded at the commercial rate from the date of judgment until payment in full. The current Bank of Uganda commercial rate of 16% per annum is appropriate for refund of purchase price in a land sale transaction.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Order 9 Rule 20
Where a defendant files a defence but fails to comply with court directions to file witness statements and does not attend trial despite substituted service, the court may grant an order for the plaintiff to proceed ex parte under Order 9 rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (8)

  • Kyarimpa Sarah v Harriet Hewett (High Court Civil Suit No. 794 of 2016)
  • William Kasozi v DFCU Bank (High Court Civil Suit No. 1326 of 2000)
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
  • James Fredrick Nsubuga v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No. 13 of 1993)
  • Ronald Kasibante v Shell Uganda (High Court Civil Suit No. 542 of 2006)
  • Dada Cycles Ltd v Sofitra S.P.R.L Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 656 of 2005)
  • Harbutt's Plasticine Ltd v Wayne Tank and Pump Co Ltd [1970] QB 447
  • Milly Masambe v Sugar Corporation (U) Ltd and Another (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 1 of 2000)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Agnes Kabalisa v Sanyu Patrick and Another (Civil Suit N0. 381 of 2017) [2025] UGHCCD 173 (13 October 2025)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.