Wakilii

Godrich Grain Millers Limited v Board of Governors, Bugwere High School (Civil Suit 1 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1348 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of outstanding purchase price and damages for breach of contract
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with orders for payment of outstanding contract sum, general damages, punitive damages, 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 school breached its contract with the plaintiff supplier by failing to pay the outstanding balance of UGX 105,050,000 for maize flour supplied under a formal supply agreement. The court found that payment terms required settlement in the second week of every term, and the defendant's failure to honour this obligation despite ceasing to deal with the plaintiff constituted breach. The plaintiff was awarded the outstanding sum plus general damages of UGX 15,000,000 and punitive damages of UGX 5,000,000.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with orders for payment of outstanding contract sum, general damages, punitive damages, interest, and costs

Facts

In June 2023, Bugwere High School contracted Godrich Grain Millers Limited to supply dry food (maize flour) pursuant to contract committee minute BHSN/04/003/2023. The contract specified payment in the second week of every term. Between June and October 2023, the plaintiff supplied 36.5 tons of maize flour at UGX 3,700 per kilogram, totalling UGX 135,050,000. The defendant paid UGX 30,000,000 in September 2023, leaving an outstanding balance of UGX 105,050,000. Despite demand notices dated 21 September 2023 and 5 December 2023, the defendant failed to pay the balance. The defendant admitted the debt but claimed payment depended on quarterly government grant allocations. The plaintiff ceased supplies in September 2023 after the defendant failed to honour payment terms.

Issues

  1. Whether there was breach of contract between the parties?
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • It is declared that the Defendant breached the contract.
  • The Defendant is ordered to pay the outstanding balance of UGX 105,050,000 to the Plaintiff.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded general damages of UGX 15,000,000.
  • The Plaintiff is further awarded punitive damages of UGX 5,000,000.
  • Interest of 5% on punitive and general damages is awarded from the date of this judgment to payment in full.
  • Costs are awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Failure to Pay Purchase Price
A buyer who wrongfully neglects or refuses to pay for goods according to the terms of a sale contract commits a breach of contract, entitling the seller to maintain an action for the price of the goods under section 48(1) of the Sale of Goods Act.
Contract Law — Payment Terms — Government Institution Funding Constraints
A government institution's reliance on quarterly grant allocations does not excuse non-payment where the contract specifies clear payment terms requiring settlement in the second week of every term, particularly where the institution has ceased dealing with the supplier.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Breach of Commercial Contract
General damages for breach of a commercial supply contract are compensatory and should restore satisfaction to the injured party. Where a buyer unjustifiably withholds payment for goods supplied, causing economic loss to the seller's business, general damages are recoverable to indemnify the loss suffered.
Damages & Quantum — Punitive Damages — Adamant Refusal to Honour Contract
Punitive damages may be awarded where a party, aware of its contractual debt, adamantly fails to pay or honour the contract over an extended period. Such damages serve to punish the defendant and deter repetition of similar conduct, but should not be used to enrich the plaintiff.
Evidence — Burden of Proof — Civil Cases
In civil cases, the burden lies on the plaintiff to prove his or her case on the balance of probabilities. Under section 101 of the Evidence Act, whoever desires the court to give judgment as to any legal right dependent on the existence of facts which he or she asserts must prove that those facts exist.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (7)

  • Uganda Petroleum Co. Ltd v Kampala City Council (Civil Suit No. 250 of 2005)
  • Nsubuga v Kavuma [1981] HCB 307
  • Meridiana African Airlines (U) Ltd v Avma Spares (EA) Ltd (HCCS No. 111 of 2017)
  • Hadley v Baxendale [1854] EWHC J70
  • Kabandize John Baptist & 21 Others v Kampala Capital City Authority (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016)
  • Takiya Kashwahiri and Another v Kajungu Denis (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 85 of 2011)
  • Luzinda v Ssekamatte & 3 Ors [2020] UGHCCD 20

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Godrich Grain Millers Limited v Board of Governors, Bugwere High School (Civil Suit 1 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 1348 (9 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.