Cafe Technical Services Ltd & Anor v J.W. Opolot Construction (U) Ltd (CIVIL SUIT No. 0007 OF 2013)
Observed later treatment
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 valid sub-contracts existed between the parties and the defendant breached its payment obligations. However, both plaintiffs failed to perform their obligations in a good and workmanlike manner. The court rejected the claim for general damages under the principle of ex turpi causa but awarded special damages on a quantum meruit basis, recognising that the defendant received a benefit and should pay reasonable remuneration for work actually done.
Outcome
Judgment entered for the plaintiffs on a quantum meruit basis with special damages and interest awarded
Facts
Two companies were sub-contracted by the defendant to supervise construction and construct a five-stance waterborne toilet at Arua Public Secondary School. The first plaintiff was to supervise classroom construction for shs. 25,000,000/=. The second plaintiff was to construct the toilet for shs. 18,000,000/=, supply 10,000 concrete blocks for shs. 30,000,000/=, and paid a commitment fee of shs. 20,000,000/=. The defendant's head contract was terminated on 10 April 2013 due to failure to supply materials. The first plaintiff worked for five months but was not paid. The second plaintiff produced only 7,000 of 10,000 blocks due to faulty machines, bad weather, and limited space. After termination, the defendant instructed the second plaintiff to level the site for shs. 23,000,000/=, which was done. Neither plaintiff was paid, prompting this suit. The defendant failed to appear and the case proceeded ex parte.
Issues
- Whether there exists valid contracts between the plaintiffs and the defendant.
- Whether the defendant breached any of those contracts.
- Whether any of the plaintiffs is entitled to the reliefs sought.
Orders
- Special damages of Shs. 25,000,000/= awarded to the first plaintiff.
- Special damages of Shs. 64,000,000/= awarded to the second plaintiff.
- Interest on the awards at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of judgment until payment in full.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiffs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (13)
- Kirugi and Another v Kabiya and Three Others [1987] KLR 347
- Duncan v Blundell (1820) 171 ER 749
- Cousins v Paddon (1835) 150 ER 234
- Conquer v Boot [1928] 2 KB 336
- Purser and Co (Hillingdon) Ltd v Jackson and Another [1971] 1 QB 166
- National Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1981] AC 675
- Porter v Tottenham UDC [1915] 1 KB 776
- Davis Contractors v Fareham UDC [1956] AC 696
- Hattin v Chase 33 A 989 (Me 1895)
- British Steel Corporation v Cleveland Bridge and Engineering Co Ltd [1984] 1 All ER 504
- Turriff Construction Ltd v Regalia Knitting Mills Ltd (1971) 9 BLR 20
- The Rio Claro [1987] 2 Lloyd's Rep 173
- Kyambadde v Mpigi District Administration [1983] HCB 44
Cases citing this judgment (4)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.