Wakilii

Central Purchasing Corporation Ltd v Hon. Maj. Gen. (RTD) Kahinda Otafiire (HCT-00-CC-CS 627 of 2003)

High Court · [2007] UGCOMMC 71 · 2007 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil suit for recovery of debt arising from sale of goods; defendant initially sought summary procedure dismissal but obtained leave to defend
Decision
Defendant liable for outstanding debt of UGX 83,250,000 with interest 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

The High Court held that the defendant personally ordered and took delivery of 10,000 iron sheets worth UGX 86,000,000 from the plaintiff through his agents. The court rejected the defendant's claim that the order was placed by Ruhinda Schools Development Committee, finding this an unpleaded afterthought unsupported by evidence. Property in the goods passed to the defendant when the contract was made under Sale of Goods Act section 19. The plaintiff was awarded the outstanding debt of UGX 83,250,000 plus interest at 25% per annum from the date of judgment.

Outcome

Defendant liable for outstanding debt of UGX 83,250,000 with interest and costs

Facts

In October 1999, the defendant telephoned the plaintiff's Managing Director requesting urgent supply of 10,000 galvanised iron sheets on credit. The defendant sent a handwritten note confirming his cheque would be ready within four days and issued cheque number 6500015702 for UGX 86,000,000. The plaintiff released the iron sheets to the defendant's agents based on this arrangement. The cheque was banked after four days but bounced with the notation 'refer to drawer'. The defendant subsequently paid only UGX 2,750,000, leaving UGX 83,250,000 outstanding. The defendant later claimed he had acted on behalf of Ruhinda Schools Development Committee and that intermediaries including Simon Kibule, Kakare, and Bruno Mugisha had ordered and received the goods, and that he had agreed the cheque would not be banked until delivery was confirmed to him personally.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff supplied iron sheets to the defendant.
  2. Whether the defendant paid for the iron sheets.
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay the plaintiff UGX 83,250,000.
  • Interest awarded at 25% per annum from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Formation of Contract — Offer and Acceptance — Oral Agreement Confirmed in Writing
A contract may be formed through telephone conversation followed by written confirmation, and the parties are bound by such agreement where offer and acceptance are clearly established.
Commercial Law — Sale of Goods — Transfer of Property — Section 19 Sale of Goods Act
Under section 19 of the Sale of Goods Act, where there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, property in the goods passes to the buyer when the contract is made, regardless of whether payment or delivery is postponed, subject to the intention of the parties.
Commercial Law — Sale of Goods — Risk — Delivery Through Agents
When property in goods passes to the buyer, risk passes with it. Where a buyer entrusts delivery to his own agents and the goods disappear in their possession, the buyer bears the risk and remains liable for payment.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Amendment — Raising New Case at Trial
A party is bound to prove the case as alleged in the pleadings and as covered in the framed issues. A party cannot succeed on a case not set up in the pleadings or raise a case inconsistent with the pleadings at trial except by way of formal amendment.
Evidence — Hearsay — Admissibility — Statement of Person Not Called as Witness
Evidence of a statement made by a person not called as a witness is hearsay and inadmissible when the object is to establish the truth of what is contained in the statement. It is admissible when the purpose is to establish the fact that the statement was made, not its truth.
Commercial Law — Interest on Debt — Discretion of Court — Commercial Transactions
Interest on a liquidated debt in a commercial transaction is awarded at the court's discretion from the date of judgment where the defendant has kept the plaintiff out of money and had the use of it, to compensate the plaintiff accordingly.
Contract Law — Privity of Contract — Agency — Liability of Principal
Under the principle qui facit per alium facit per se (he who does something through another does it himself), a principal who orders goods and takes delivery through agents remains personally liable for payment under the contract.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Sale of Goods Act s.19
  • Sale of Goods Act s.48

Cases cited (4)

  • Interfreight Forwarders Ltd v East African Development Bank (SCCA No. 33 of 1993)
  • Subramaniam v Public Prosecutor [1956] 1 WLR 965
  • Harbutt's Plasticine Ltd v Wayne Tank and Pump Co Ltd [1970] 1 QB 447
  • Sietco v Noble Builders (U) Ltd (SCCA No. 31 of 1995)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Central Purchasing Corporation Ltd v Hon. Maj. Gen. (RTD) Kahinda Otafiire (HCT-00-CC-CS 627 of 2003) [2007] UGCommC 71 (30 August 2007)
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.