Wakilii

Erisa Kaheru v Foods & Beverages Ltd (Civil Suit No. DR. MFP 13 1988)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 17 · 1992 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit in detinue for return of property or payment of value thereof
Decision
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff for 623,000 shillings plus 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 company was liable in detinue for goods taken from the plaintiff's uniport by its servants. The court found that the defendant's servants unlawfully entered the plaintiff's uniport, took possession of his property, and thereafter damaged or converted the items. The plaintiff was awarded the assessed value of the converted goods plus general damages. The court rejected the defendant's argument that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages, finding that the plaintiff took all reasonable steps but was frustrated by the defendant's conduct.

Outcome

Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff for 623,000 shillings plus interest and costs

Facts

In November 1985, the plaintiff purchased a uniport at Mugurusi Road, Kasese Town, built on land adjacent to the defendant's residential house. In 1986, the defendant's employees unlawfully entered the uniport and forcibly took possession of it and all the plaintiff's property therein, including furniture, household items, and cotton. The defendant's servants removed the properties to the defendant's stores. Despite the plaintiff's demands, the defendant refused to return the property. The plaintiff obtained judgment at the RC2 court for return of the uniport, and some items (two tables and a calabash) were returned, but the rest of the property was either damaged, missing, or converted. The plaintiff then filed this civil suit in detinue seeking return of the property or payment of its value.

Issues

  1. What were the contents in the uniport?
  2. How much of the property was damaged or converted by the defendant's servants?
  3. Whether the plaintiff took reasonable steps to mitigate the damages?

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay 523,000 shillings for properties converted or spoiled (sofa set, saucepans, cupboard, mat, spring bed, bed sheets, mattress, chairs, and cotton).
  • Defendant to pay 100,000 shillings as general damages for deprivation of property.
  • Total award: 623,000 shillings.
  • Plaintiff awarded costs of the suit.
  • Interest at court rates on the decretal sum from date of judgment until payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Detinue — Remedy — Defendant's option to return chattel or pay its value
At common law, a defendant held liable in detinue is ordered to deliver up the chattel to the plaintiff or to pay its value as assessed and in either event to pay damages for its detention, such that the defendant has the option to return the chattel or pay its value.
Pleadings — Evidence must be consistent with pleadings
Evidence must be consistent with pleadings and the court is not permitted to reach a decision based on a ground which was not pleaded.
Resistance Committee Courts — Jurisdiction — Civil disputes involving conversion and damage to property
Under the Resistance Committee Judicial Powers Statute 1988, Resistance Committee Courts have jurisdiction to entertain civil suits connected with conversion and damage to property, and their jurisdiction is apparently unlimited.
Damages — Mitigation — Plaintiff's duty to take reasonable steps
A plaintiff who fails to take all reasonable steps to mitigate damages is debarred from claiming any part of the damages which is due to the plaintiff's neglect to take such steps.
Assessment of value — Secondhand goods — Current market value as proper guideline
Where property converted or spoiled is secondhand and no receipts are produced, the court may assess value based on investigation of current market prices for similar items by both parties, taking into account the condition and age of the goods.
Vicarious liability — Acts of servants in course of employment
An employer is vicariously liable for the tortious acts of its servants committed in the course of their employment, and a denial that servants were acting in the course of employment must be supported by evidence.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Resistance Committee Judicial Powers Statute 1988 s.15(1)(a)
  • Resistance Committee Judicial Powers Statute 1988 First Schedule Part 2(1)

Cases cited (4)

  • Captain Harry vs. Gespair Air Charles limited 1955-1956 XII EA CA 139
  • RC Scarth (1874) LR 10 Ch App. 234
  • Kasure Makerere University (1975) HCB p.376
  • Tajar's 167/1969

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Erisa Kaheru v Foods & Beverages Ltd (Civil Suit No. DR. MFP 13_1988) [1992] UGHC 17 (13 November 1992)
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.