Group Four Security Ltd v N.K. Radia (Civil Suit No. 752 of 1997) (Civil Suit No. 752 of 1997)
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 dismissed both the plaintiff's claim for unpaid guard services and the defendant's counterclaim. The plaintiff's claim failed because of overwhelming discrepancies in the amounts claimed (UGX 9,303,948, UGX 6,481,360, and UGX 6,846,400) and the plaintiff's failure to render a consistent account after the defendant requested documentation. Although the court found that the plaintiff's guards had occupied the defendant's premises and sold waragi there, the counterclaim for mesne profits failed because the defendant did not prove loss of rent from potential tenants, damage to the property, or how the claimed monthly rent of UGX 300,000 was calculated.
Outcome
Both suit and counterclaim dismissed with costs to the defendant
Facts
The defendant engaged the plaintiff to provide guard services at multiple premises including a house at Old Kampala described as 'Evicted House Old Kampala' under a Temporary Works Order dated 3 April 1995. The contract provided for two unarmed guards at a monthly rate of UGX 449,000. The plaintiff provided the services but claimed the defendant failed to pay, ultimately claiming UGX 9,303,948. The defendant counterclaimed UGX 5,100,000 as mesne profits, alleging that from April 1995 to December 1996 the plaintiff's guards occupied the house as their residence, sold and consumed waragi on the premises, and turned the house into a bar causing nuisance to neighbours. The Local Council security officer confirmed the guards' occupation and waragi-selling activities. The plaintiff withdrew its guards on 18 December 1996 after the defendant declined to pay pending receipt of proper accounts. The defendant requested detailed statements of accounts, receipts, credit notes, and contracts but the plaintiff did not provide them, instead commencing legal proceedings.
Issues
- Whether the guard services were paid for.
- If not paid for, what amount is outstanding for payment.
- Whether the plaintiff is liable to the defendant on the counterclaim for mesne profits or damages arising from its guards' alleged occupation and misuse of the defendant's premises.
Orders
- Suit dismissed with costs.
- Counterclaim dismissed with costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.