Dr. Beyaza v UMEME Limited (EDT COMPLAINT 11 of 2013)
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 Tribunal held that UMEME's disconnection of the complainant's electricity supply was unlawful. The Respondent failed to produce credible evidence of meter tampering or bypass. The notice left at the premises stated only that meters were taken for testing, not that a bypass was discovered. No field report was produced, and consumption readings after meters were relocated showed no significant variation, contradicting the allegation of power theft. The Tribunal ordered refund of the fraud bill and awarded general damages.
Outcome
Judgment entered for the Complainant; Respondent ordered to refund fraud bill and pay general damages
Facts
The Complainant owned an 8-unit apartment block in Kyebando, each unit with its own electricity meter. On 11 July 2013, UMEME officials visited the premises, removed three meters for testing, and disconnected power. The notice left stated only that meters were taken for testing. The Complainant was later told that a green wire bypassing the meters had been discovered, indicating power theft. Power was reconnected on 15 July 2013 after the Complainant met with UMEME's manager, and meters were relocated to a pole outside the premises. On 29 October 2013, UMEME disconnected four tenants and imposed fraud bills totalling approximately UGX 4,000,000. The Complainant provided consumption printouts showing no significant variation before and after meter relocation. UMEME reduced the fraud bill to UGX 1,956,500, which the Complainant paid under protest to restore power to his tenants who were threatening to vacate.
Issues
- Whether the Respondent's disconnection of the Complainant's electricity supply was lawful.
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to the remedies sought.
Orders
- Declared that it was not justifiable and lawful for the Respondent to disconnect the Complainant's power.
- Ordered that UGX 1,956,500 paid by the Complainant to the Respondent as a fine and/or fraud bill be refunded to the Complainant.
- Ordered that UGX 7,000,000 as general damages be paid to the Complainant.
- Ordered that costs of this action are awarded to the Complainant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Electricity (Primary Grid Code) Regulations 2013 reg.7.5.1(d)
- Electricity (Primary Grid Code) Regulations 2013 reg.7.5.1(e)
- Electricity (Primary Grid Code) Regulations 2013 reg.7.6.1(a)
- Electricity (Primary Grid Code) Regulations 2013 reg.7.6.1(c)
- Electricity (Primary Grid Code) Regulations 2013 reg.15.5.1
- Evidence Act Cap 6 s.101
- Evidence Act Cap 6 s.102
- Evidence Act Cap 6 s.103
Cases cited (1)
- Emily Luwedde v Yafesi Katimbo (High Court Civil Suit No. 1081 of 1999)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.