Wakilii

Jephtar & Sons Construction & Engineering Works Ltd v Attorney General (HCT-00-CV-CS-0699-2006)

High Court · [2009] UGHC 132 · 2009 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract, decided on written submissions after defendant's admission of liability for principal sum
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with general damages, interest on admitted principal sum, 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

Where a defendant admits liability for an outstanding contractual sum after suit is filed, the plaintiff is entitled to general damages for being kept out of money that could have been put to productive use, interest from date of filing suit at commercial rate, and costs, notwithstanding the defendant's claim that non-payment resulted from cessation of third-party funding.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with general damages, interest on admitted principal sum, and costs

Facts

The plaintiff construction company contracted with the Government of Uganda to renovate 13 community centre buildings and related works in four districts for Shs.275,422,157, funded by the European Commission. The defendant paid 30% down payment but defaulted on the balance. The plaintiff completed the works to satisfaction. After suit was filed, the defendant made some payments and ultimately admitted liability for the outstanding balance of Shs.40,189,000. The parties could not agree on general damages, interest and costs, and submitted written arguments on those issues without leading evidence. The defendant argued that non-payment resulted from the European Commission abruptly stopping funding in December 2004, four months after the August 2004 contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any damages.
  2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest claimed.
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs.

Orders

  • General damages of Shs.2,500,000 awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Interest on the decretal sum of Shs.40,189,000 at 25% per annum from the date of filing suit till payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach — General Damages — Entitlement where Principal Sum Admitted
Where a defendant admits liability for an outstanding contractual sum, a plaintiff commercial enterprise is entitled to general damages for the foreseeable loss of being kept out of money that could have been put to profitable and productive use in its business, regardless of whether the defendant was prevented from paying by cessation of third-party funding.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Compensatory Purpose — Assessment
The general effect of an award of general damages is to place the plaintiff in the same financial position as if the contract had been performed; general damages are awarded to compensate the plaintiff for losses that the law presumes are the natural and probable consequence of a wrong, not as punishment to the defendant.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Date from which Interest Runs — Liquidated Sum
Where a person is entitled to a liquidated amount and has been deprived of it through the wrongful act of another person, interest should be awarded from the date of filing the suit at the commercial rate until payment in full.
Contract Law — Breach — Defences — Frustration — Pleading Requirements
A defendant cannot rely on frustration of contract as a defence to non-payment where frustration was never pleaded as a fact, even where the defendant asserts that a third-party funder abruptly stopped funding before contract completion.

Cases cited (1)

  • Sietco v Noble Builders (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 31 of 1995)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Jephtar & Sons Construction & Engineering Works Ltd v Attorney General (HCT-00-CV-CS-0699-2006) [2009] UGHC 132 (24 April 2009)
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.