Interfreight Forwarders(U) Limited v EastAfrican Development Bank (Civil Appeal 33 of 1992)
Observed later treatment
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 Supreme Court allowed the appeal. The respondent sued the carrier for a new Volvo destroyed in transit, pleading negligence. Held: (1) the trial judge erred in basing liability on common-carrier strict liability, a cause of action neither pleaded nor among the framed issues, since a party cannot succeed on an unpleaded case; and (2) on the unrebutted evidence the accident was an inevitable accident caused by an oncoming bus, not the driver's negligence. The High Court judgment was set aside and the plaint dismissed with costs to the appellant. The Court observed, on the unsuccessful grounds, that damages may be awarded in the foreign currency that most truly expresses the plaintiff's loss.
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside and the respondent's plaint dismissed, with costs to the appellant.
Facts
The respondent bank engaged the appellant freight forwarder, for reward, to clear a brand-new Volvo car (purchased for about £9,465) from Mombasa and deliver it to Kampala. While the car was being transported on a vehicle carrier, the carrier's driver, on a hill, saw a bus approaching at high speed on a rough road. To avoid a head-on collision he swerved off the road and braked suddenly; the impact threw three of the cars on the carrier, including the Volvo, off the carrier, damaging the Volvo beyond repair. The bank sued for breach of contract and negligence. The only eyewitness was the appellant's driver, whose account was unrebutted. The High Court found the driver negligent and, alternatively, held the appellant strictly liable as a common carrier, awarding £10,275 (the increased replacement cost) with interest at 36% and costs.
Issues
- Whether the trial judge erred in law by basing his judgment on common-carrier strict liability, a cause of action neither pleaded nor included in the agreed issues.
- Whether the evidence supported a finding that the accident was caused by the driver's negligence rather than being an inevitable accident.
- Whether the trial court applied correct principles in assessing damages and in awarding them in a foreign currency.
- Whether the award of interest at 36% was excessive, arbitrary or unjustified.
- Whether the decree, alleged to conflict with the judgment and to have been irregularly prepared, was a proper ground of appeal to the Supreme Court.
Orders
- Appeal allowed on grounds one and two.
- Judgment of the High Court set aside.
- Plaint of the respondent dismissed.
- Appellant awarded the costs of the suit and of the appeal.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
Cases cited (7)
- v The Acacia Co. Ltd (1959) E.A. 248
- v Sunderly Post Ltd (1958) E.A. 428
- Miliangos (supra)
- The Despina R (supra)
- Liesbosch Dredger vs S.S. Edison
- Moore v D.E.R. Ltd (1971) 1 WLR 1476
- Singaram v Galstrun (1930) A.I.R. P.C. 205
Cases citing this judgment (7)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
- Cwezi Properties Limited v Tulip Consultancy Limited (Civil Appeal No. 124 of 2015) followed
- Hass Petroleum (U) Limited v Kena International Limited and Another (Civil Suit No. 275 of 2021)
- The Owners of Condominuim Plan No. 0031 & 3 Others v Lachen Investments Limited & 2 Others (Civil Suit 886 of 2020) followed
- Granada Hotels Uganda Limited v Tayssiir Zereli (Labour Dispute Appeal 17 of 2022)
- Makanga and Another v Kinaalwa Kazibwe (Civil Appeal 67 of 2023)
- Bakakunda v Tibamanya and 10 0thers (HCT-00-CV-LD-CS 13 of 2017)
- Grivas Musisi and Prayer Palace Ministries t a Dunamis Broadcasting Limited v Jed Daniel Kabanda and Namalwa Rita (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 52 of 2025)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.