Wakilii

Byakiika v Amotrust Construction Services Limited and 3 Others (Civil Suit No. 951 of 2018)

High Court · [2022] UGCOMMC 79 · 2022 Preliminary Objection Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection by the 3rd Defendant that the Plaint does not disclose a cause of action
Decision
Preliminary objection dismissed; matter to proceed on merits

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 Plaint disclosed a cause of action against the 3rd Defendant. The court found that an assignment of payment rights had occurred between the 1st and 3rd Defendants and the Plaintiff, as evidenced by written agreements. The 3rd Defendant had been notified and understood that payment obligations had been transferred to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff was not a stranger to the subcontract and had standing to sue. Preliminary objection overruled.

Outcome

Preliminary objection dismissed; matter to proceed on merits

Facts

The 1st Defendant entered into a subcontract with the 3rd Defendant for construction works. By letter dated 5 October 2018, the 1st Defendant introduced the Plaintiff as its business associate to the 3rd Defendant. A variation deed dated 22 October 2018 was signed by all parties, including representatives of the 3rd Defendant, agreeing that one dam would be excavated at a cost of UGX 90,000,000 and all payments would be made directly to the Plaintiff. Written agreements provided the Plaintiff's account details for payment. The Plaintiff alleged that only UGX 20,000,000 had been paid despite demand. The 3rd Defendant raised a preliminary objection that the Plaint disclosed no cause of action as there was no privity of contract between the Plaintiff and the 3rd Defendant.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaint discloses a cause of action against the 3rd Defendant
  2. Whether there was privity of contract between the Plaintiff and the 3rd Defendant sufficient to confer standing to sue

Orders

  • Preliminary objection overruled.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Plaint Disclosing a Cause of Action
For a plaint to disclose a cause of action, it must show that the plaintiff enjoyed a right, the right was violated, and the defendant is liable for the violation.
Contract Law — Assignment of Contractual Rights — Notice to Debtor
The benefit of a contract can be transferred to a third party by assignment. No particular form is necessary and the assignment need not be in writing. All that is necessary is that the debtor should be given to understand that the debt has been made over by the creditor to the third person, and if the debtor ignores such notice he does so at his peril.
Contract Law — Privity of Contract — Standing to Sue on Assignment
Where there is an assignment of payment rights and the principal debtor has been notified and given to understand that the debt has been made over to the assignee, the assignee is not a stranger to the contract and has standing to sue the principal debtor.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (6)

  • Read vs Brown 22 QBD P.31
  • Auto Garage & Others v Motokov [1971] EA 514
  • Professor George William Kakoma v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 197 of 2008)
  • Kiga Lane Hotel Limited v Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (Civil Suit No. 557 of 2004)
  • Lunco Constructors Limited v Attorney General & Another (Civil Suit No. 318 of 2004)
  • Kayanja v New India Assurance Company Ltd (1968) EA 295

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Byakiika v Amotrust Construction Services Limited and 3 Others (Civil Suit No. 951 of 2018) [2022] UGCommC 79 (21 June 2022)
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.