Birumi Wilson v Akamba (Uganda) Ltd [1995] UGSC 4
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 Court held that the contract for the sale of the tractor and its accessories was made directly between the appellant and the foreign manufacturers, who were paid directly through the appellant's bank. The respondent merely helped the appellant make contact and supplied a proforma invoice bearing the manufacturers' address; no contractual relationship existed between appellant and respondent, who could not be sued. The respondent's voluntary release of a tractor out of sympathy did not make it assume the manufacturer's liability. The Indian Contract Act no longer applied (Contract Act Cap. 75 s.2); English common law of privity governed. The trial judge properly refused a vague adjournment application to join the manufacturers. Appeal dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; the High Court dismissal of the suit stands
Facts
The appellant, a sugar jaggery farmer, wished in 1987 to acquire a new Massey Ferguson tractor and accessories, funded by a loan from Uganda Commercial Bank. He sought assistance from the respondent, a Ugandan company dealing in Massey Ferguson tractors and acting as local agent for the foreign manufacturers, Massey Ferguson (UK) Ltd. A sales manager of the respondent supplied the appellant with a proforma invoice and general terms of business. The appellant established irrevocable letters of credit through his bank for £14,735 in favour of the manufacturers, payable in London, and payment was made directly to the manufacturers by telex. Delivery was delayed; out of sympathy the respondent allowed the appellant to take one of its own tractors pending arrival of his. The appellant's tractor arrived after four months and the tiller after nine months. Dissatisfied with the delay, the appellant sued the respondent for special damages of Shs. 6,480,000/= for breach of contract.
Issues
- Whether the respondent, as local agent of a foreign principal, was a party to the contract for the sale of the tractor and could be sued for its breach.
- Whether the respondent assumed the manufacturer's liability by voluntarily releasing one of its own tractors to the appellant pending delivery.
- Whether the trial judge exercised his discretion judiciously in refusing an adjournment to enable counsel to join Massey Ferguson as a party.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs of the appeal to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Contract Act (Cap. 75) s.2
- Contract Act (Cap. 75) s.3(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.16(2)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.15 r.1
Cases cited (5)
- Parker's case
- Uganda Motors Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1991)
- B. Mohindra v Mohindra (1953) 20 EACA 56
- Chitty on contract 22nd ed. ... 78
- Bullen and Leake's
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.