Wakilii

Equipment Solutions Limited v Rohi Investments Limited (Civil Suit 1342 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 521 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract with formal proof of damages following interlocutory judgment entered in default of defence
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with general damages, interest, and costs awarded

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 awarded general damages of UGX 20,000,000 to the plaintiff for breach of construction equipment hire agreements where the defendant failed to comply with payment terms. The court declined to award aggravated damages, finding that although the defendant breached payment obligations, its conduct did not reach the threshold of callousness and indifference required for such an award, as it made partial payments and expressed willingness to resolve the dispute.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with general damages, interest, and costs awarded

Facts

The plaintiff entered into two construction equipment hire agreements with the defendant on 12 June 2023 and 17 August 2023 for graders and roller-compactors to be used at the defendant's Kingfisher, Kyangwali site. The agreed rates were UGX 1,200,000 and UGX 700,000 per working day respectively. The agreements required payment for 10 days in advance upon mobilisation and thereafter every 10 days. The plaintiff mobilised the equipment and provided operators who compiled worksheets recording dates and hours worked. The defendant used the machines between June 2023 and September 2024 but failed to honour monthly invoices as agreed, making only partial and delayed payments. By the time of suit, an outstanding balance of UGX 124,950,000 remained. The defendant failed to file a defence, and interlocutory judgment was entered on 20 May 2025 declaring breach and ordering payment of the debt. The matter proceeded to formal proof of damages.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to general damages.
  2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to aggravated damages.
  3. What reliefs are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The Defendant shall pay general damages to the Plaintiff in the sum of UGX 20,000,000.
  • Interest on general damages awarded at the rate of 14% 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 — Breach of Contract — General Damages — Assessment
General damages refer to losses which flow naturally from a defendant's breach and are what the law presumes to be the direct, natural and probable result of the breach. They are the immediate, direct and proximate result of the wrong complained of.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment — Loss of Use of Capital
Where a party is kept out of use of its money due to breach of contract, the natural and probable consequence is financial loss and inconvenience from not having access to capital and profits as expected. General damages are awardable as fair, just and adequate compensation for such non-quantifiable loss.
Damages & Quantum — Aggravated Damages — Threshold for Award
Aggravated damages are compensatory but enhanced following a defendant's aggravating conduct. They are awardable if aggravating circumstances like malice, ill-will, or persistence in falsehood exist in the conduct or intention of the defendant. The defendant's conduct must reach a threshold of callousness and indifference to justify such an award.
Damages & Quantum — Aggravated Damages — Partial Compliance with Obligations
Where a defendant makes partial payments and expresses willingness to resolve a payment dispute, such conduct, considered objectively and wholesomely, falls below the threshold of callousness and indifference required to justify an award of aggravated damages, notwithstanding repeated breaches of payment obligations.
Damages & Quantum — Interest on Damages — Discretion of Court
A court has discretion under section 26(2) of the Civil Procedure Act to award interest on damages. A successful plaintiff is ordinarily entitled to interest at a rate that does not neglect the prevailing economic value of money and which insulates against economic vagaries like inflation and currency depreciation where money ordered to be recovered is not paid promptly.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (8)

  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
  • Opia Moses v Chukia Lumago Roselyn & 5 Ors (HCCS No. 0022 of 2013)
  • Uganda Revenue Authority v Wanume David Kitamirike (CACA No. 43 of 2010)
  • Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd v Deogratius Asiimwe (SCCA No. 18 of 2018)
  • Bank of Uganda v Betty Tinkamanyire (SCCA No. 12 of 2007)
  • Fredrick Zaabwe v Orient Bank & Ors (SCCA No. 4 of 2006)
  • Mohanlal Kakubhai v Warid Telecom (U) Ltd (HCCS No. 0224 of 2011)
  • Kwizera Eddie v Attorney General (SC Const. Appeal No. 01 of 2008)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Equipment Solutions Limited v Rohi Investments Limited (Civil Suit 1342 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 521 (30 December 2025)
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.