Wakilii

Aloysious Kakooza Ssalongo and Others v Kampala City Council (Civil Suit No.1213 of 1997) (Civil Suit No.1213 of 1997)

High Court · [2006] UGHC 5 · 2006 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for specific performance and damages for deceit
Decision
All plaintiffs' suits dismissed

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

The High Court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit with costs. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant agreed to allocate stalls measuring 7 feet by 7 feet after reconstruction. The evidence showed that no written agreement existed and witness testimony was contradictory and insufficient to establish the alleged oral agreement on stall dimensions. The court also found that one plaintiff, Gordon Musoke, lacked locus standi as he was not named in the plaint.

Outcome

All plaintiffs' suits dismissed

Facts

Nine plaintiffs were vendors at Owino Market who had occupied stalls between 1960 and 1994. In 1994, the defendant commenced reconstruction of the market with World Bank funding. The plaintiffs alleged that during reconstruction, the defendant promised them that they would be allocated stalls measuring 7 feet by 7 feet after completion at no additional cost provided they continued paying monthly rental dues. The plaintiffs continued paying their dues during the reconstruction. After completion in 1997, the defendant allegedly failed to allocate the promised stalls or allocated stalls of smaller dimensions (between 2 feet by 3 feet and 3 feet by 5 feet). The defendant denied making any agreement regarding 7 feet by 7 feet stalls. Negotiations between the defendant and the Municipal Market Vendors Association had occurred but there was no written agreement. The defendant's evidence showed that stall sizes were to vary by type of goods sold and vendors were required to pay for construction of slabs.

Issues

  1. Whether an oral agreement existed between the plaintiffs and the defendant for allocation of stalls measuring 7 feet by 7 feet after reconstruction of Owino Market
  2. Whether the defendant breached the alleged agreement by failing to allocate the promised stalls to the plaintiffs
  3. Whether the defendant committed deceit entitling the plaintiffs to general damages
  4. Whether the suit was statute barred
  5. Whether Gordon Musoke had locus standi as a plaintiff

Orders

  • Suits dismissed with costs
  • Gordon Musoke's claim dismissed with no costs awarded to the defendant

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Burden of Proof — Civil Cases — Balance of Probabilities
In civil cases, the burden of proof lies on the party making an allegation to prove it on a balance of probabilities.
Contract Law — Formation — Oral Agreements — Proof Requirements
Where a party alleges the existence of an oral contract with specific terms, that party bears the burden of proving on a balance of probabilities that those specific terms were agreed upon.
Evidence — Documentary Evidence — Adverse Inference — Failure to Produce
A court may draw an adverse inference against a party who fails to produce relevant documents, but the burden of proof remains on the party making the allegation to utilize proper procedures for production of documents.
Evidence — Witness Testimony — Contradictions — Assessment of Credibility
Minor contradictions between defence witnesses do not render their evidence worthless where the substance of their testimony is consistent and credible, particularly where the contradictions are not challenged in cross-examination.
Civil Procedure — Parties — Locus Standi — Plaintiff Not Named in Plaint
A person whose name does not appear in the plaint and who has not been added by amendment has no locus standi to pursue a claim under section 19 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order V of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Departure from Pleadings — Amendment Required
Where a party's evidence departs from the pleadings without an authorized amendment, the evidence on the unpleaded matter cannot be relied upon to prove the case.
Contract Law — Breach — Specific Performance — Failure to Prove Agreement
A claim for specific performance must fail where the plaintiff has not established the existence of a binding agreement containing the specific terms alleged to have been breached.

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Aloysious Kakooza Ssalongo and Others v Kampala City Council (Civil Suit No.1213 of 1997) (Civil Suit No.1213 of 1997) [2006] UGHC 5 (13 February 2006)
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.