Wakilii

Crestanks Limited v Coil Limited (Civil Suit No. 861 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGCOMMC 405 · 2024 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of debt and breach of contract damages
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with nominal damages of UGX 3,000,000, interest at 8% per annum on nominal damages from judgment date, 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 court declined to award general damages for delayed payment where the plaintiff had already been compensated through contractual interest at 4% per month (48% per annum) agreed in the contract terms. Common law does not award general damages for delay in payment of a debt beyond the contractually due date. The plaintiff failed to prove special circumstances or losses beyond those arising from the ordinary delay. However, nominal damages of UGX 3,000,000 were awarded to affirm the legal right infringed despite the defendant's eventual payment.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with nominal damages of UGX 3,000,000, interest at 8% per annum on nominal damages from judgment date, and costs

Facts

On 16 June 2023, the defendant issued two local purchase orders to the plaintiff to supply water tanks, pipes and fittings totalling UGX 34,939,000 on 45-day credit terms. Delivery was made on 20 and 23 June 2023. The credit period expired on 8 August 2023 without payment. The plaintiff's tax invoice terms provided for 4% monthly interest on overdue accounts. The plaintiff claimed the principal sum plus accrued interest totalling UGX 50,312,160 as at 18 July 2024. The defendant did not file a defence. After the suit was filed on 18 July 2024, the defendant paid the full claimed sum including contractual interest into the plaintiff's account. The plaintiff then sought general damages for breach of contract for the one year and three months delay in payment.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover general damages for breach of contract and in the alternative, without prejudice, whether the plaintiff is entitled to nominal damages?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • The defendant pays the plaintiff UGX 3,000,000 as nominal damages.
  • Interest of 8% per annum is awarded on the nominal damages from the date of this judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit are awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Damages for Breach — Delay in Payment of Debt — Award of General Damages
At common law, general damages are not awarded for delay in payment of a debt beyond the date when it is contractually due where the plaintiff has already been compensated through contractual interest agreed in the contract terms.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Principle of Restitutio in Integrum — Compensation Not Enrichment
Where a party has been compensated for delay in payment through contractual interest at 4% per month (48% per annum), awarding additional general damages for the same delay would amount to unjust enrichment beyond the principle of restitutio in integrum.
Contract Law — Special Circumstances — General Damages for Delay in Payment
In special circumstances where loss did not arise from the ordinary course of things, general damages are awarded only for such losses of which the defendant had actual knowledge; a plaintiff claiming general damages beyond contractual interest must prove such special circumstances.
Damages & Quantum — Nominal Damages — Definition and Circumstances for Award
Nominal damages affirm that a legal right has been infringed even where no real damage has been sustained or proved; a plaintiff is entitled to nominal damages where his rights have been infringed but he has not sustained actual damage from the infringement or fails to prove such damage.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (5)

  • Nasif Mujib and Another v Attorney General (HCCS No. 160 of 2014)
  • Katkar Hanumant v Miracle Motors Co Limited (Civil Suit No. 800 of 2018)
  • President of India v La Pintada Compagnia Navigacia SA [1985] AC 104
  • Hungerfords v Walker (1989) 171 CLR 125
  • The Mediana [1900] AC 113

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Crestanks Limited v Coil Limited (Civil Suit No. 861 of 2024) [2024] UGCommC 405 (10 December 2024)
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.