Wakilii

AM Lanka Trading Uganda Limited v Mbaziira (Civil Suit 390 of 2020)

High Court · [2023] UGCOMMC 83 · 2023 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 heard exparte after defendant failed to file defence
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with orders for payment of outstanding balance, interest, general damages, 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 defendant breached a memorandum of sale by failing to pay the outstanding balance of UGX 24,000,000 on a motor vehicle purchased for UGX 56,000,000. The plaintiff proved breach on the balance of probabilities despite the exparte hearing. The court awarded the outstanding principal sum, interest at 20% per annum from date of suit, and general damages of UGX 10,000,000 for depreciation and economic loss. Storage costs were denied as unpleaded special damages.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with orders for payment of outstanding balance, interest, general damages, and costs

Facts

On 23 August 2017, the defendant purchased a motor vehicle (Reg. No. UBB 591B) from the plaintiff company for UGX 56,000,000. The defendant paid UGX 32,000,000 as down payment and took possession of the vehicle, agreeing to pay the balance of UGX 24,000,000 in three monthly instalments of UGX 8,000,000 each. The agreement provided for a 20% surcharge per month on late payments. The defendant defaulted on payment obligations. On 12 August 2019, the plaintiff exercised its contractual right and impounded the vehicle. The defendant failed to file a written statement of defence despite proper service of court process. The matter proceeded exparte with formal proof.

Issues

  1. Whether the Defendant breached the memorandum of sale of motor vehicle.
  2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Declaration that the Defendant breached the Memorandum of sale of the motor vehicle dated 23rd August, 2017.
  • Payment of the outstanding sum of UGX 24,000,000.
  • Interest on the principal sum at the rate of 20% per annum from the date of filing this suit until payment in full.
  • General damages of UGX 10,000,000.
  • Costs of this suit granted to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Burden of Proof in Exparte Proceedings
Despite a defendant's failure to file a defence or offer evidence in exparte proceedings, the plaintiff still bears the burden of proving the case on the balance of probabilities even where the case is heard on formal proof only.
Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Remedies — Compensation for Loss
Where there is breach of contract, the party who suffers the breach is entitled under section 61(1) of the Contracts Act to secure compensation for any loss or damage caused.
Damages & Quantum — Special Damages — Pleading and Proof Requirements
Special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved. Storage costs claimed as special damages will be denied where not specifically pleaded and strictly proved.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment Factors
When assessing the quantum of general damages, courts must consider the value of the subject matter, the economic inconvenience that the plaintiff may have been put through, and the nature and extent of the injury suffered.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Discretion of Court — Costs Follow the Event
Costs follow the event unless for justified reasons the court otherwise orders. A successful party can only be denied costs if it is proved that, but for their conduct, the action would not have been brought.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (9)

  • Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1993)
  • Ewadra Emmanuel v Spencon Services Ltd (Civil Suit No. 0022 of 2015)
  • Kyambadde Vs Mpigi District Administration [1983] HCB 44
  • Bonham - Carter Vs Hyde Park Hotel [1948] 64 TLR 177
  • Ronald Kasibante v Shell (U) Limited (Civil Suit No. 542 of 2006)
  • Storms Vs Hutchinson [1905] A.C 515
  • Crown Beverages Ltd v Sendu Edward (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2005)
  • Uganda Commercial Bank Vs Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
  • Uganda Development Bank Vs Muganga Construction Co. Ltd (1981) H.C.B 35

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

AM Lanka Trading Uganda Limited v Mbaziira (Civil Suit 390 of 2020) [2023] UGCommC 83 (13 April 2023)
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.