Wakilii

James William Isiko t/a Jwis & Company v Raimer Establishments Limited (Civil Suit 765 of 1994)

High Court · [2002] UGHCCD 29 · 2002 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for damages arising from alleged breach of tenancy agreement
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with special 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

Held that an express covenant in a tenancy agreement requiring the landlord to repair and maintain the demised premises in good and tenantable repair condition is enforceable. A service charge for security implies an obligation to provide security services. Where the landlord fails to repair damage and withdraws security guards without replacement, the landlord breaches the tenancy agreement. If burglaries occur due to unrepaired damage and absence of security, the landlord is liable for the tenant's losses. Special damages awarded where supported by receipts.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with special damages, interest, and costs

Facts

The plaintiff, a certified accountant, occupied office premises at Geogiadis Chambers under a tenancy agreement. The defendant landlord covenanted to maintain the structure and exterior in good repair and provided security guards funded by a service charge. On 6 June 1994, thieves broke into the plaintiff's office through the ceiling and stole property. The plaintiff requested repairs but none were effected. On 22 September 1994, the defendant discontinued security guard services without notice. On 25 September 1994, thieves broke in again through the same unrepaired ceiling and window, stealing equipment valued at Shs 4,700,000 including a computer, UPS, calculators, and other office equipment. The plaintiff claimed special damages for the stolen property.

Issues

  1. Whether it was a term of the tenancy agreement that the defendant would keep the premises in good and tenantable repair.
  2. Whether the defendant was supposed to provide security services for the premises.
  3. Whether the defendant breached any of the above terms.
  4. Whether the plaintiff's loss was due to the breach.
  5. What reliefs, if any, are available to the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff.
  • Special damages of Shs 4,700,000 awarded.
  • Interest on special damages at 20% per annum from date of filing until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Landlord and Tenant — Repair Covenants — Express Obligation
Where a tenancy agreement contains an express covenant by the landlord to repair and keep the main structure and exterior of demised premises in good and tenantable repair condition, that covenant is enforceable and creates a binding obligation on the landlord.
Implied Terms — Service Charge for Security
Where a tenancy agreement provides for a service charge and the landlord has historically provided security guards funded by that charge, an implied term arises that the landlord will continue to provide security services during the tenancy.
Breach of Contract — Landlord's Obligations
A landlord breaches a tenancy agreement where the landlord fails to repair damage to the demised premises after notice from the tenant and withdraws security guards without providing replacements or notifying the tenant.
Causation — Loss Arising from Breach
Where burglaries occur through unrepaired structural damage and in the absence of contracted security, the tenant's losses are caused by the landlord's breach of repair and security obligations, and the landlord is liable for those losses.
Special Damages — Proof by Receipts
Special damages for stolen property must be proved by evidence such as receipts. Where receipts are produced and not controverted by the defendant, the full amount claimed will be awarded.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

James William Isiko t_a Jwis & Company v Raimer Establishments Limited (Civil Suit 765 of 1994) [2002] UGHCCD 29 (6 March 2002)
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.