Wakilii

Joram Turyagenda Kazunguza v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 488 of 1992)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 117 · 1994 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
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with 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 plaintiff proved on a balance of probabilities that he supplied foodstuffs under valid contracts to government institutions for financial years 1989/90 and 1990/91, that the defendant breached these contracts by failing to pay, and that the plaintiff was entitled to the contract price, general damages for breach, limited special damages, and interest from the date of breach.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with damages, interest, and costs

Facts

The plaintiff, trading through several companies (Zongex, Twazi, Twayaga, Ngoma), was awarded tenders by area tender boards to supply foodstuffs and firewood to Kabale Hospital, Kabale Nurses Training School, and Itojo Hospital for financial years 1989/90 and 1990/91. He entered into formal supply contracts with the institutions, delivered goods under local purchase orders, and obtained signed delivery notes and vouchers from medical superintendents and principals. The Ministry of Health processed payment vouchers and issued cheques in August 1991, but before collection the Inspector General of Government confiscated the vouchers, delivery notes, and cheques for investigation. No payments were made. The plaintiff claimed he had borrowed money to finance the supplies and was being pressed by creditors. He brought suit against the Attorney General for breach of contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff supplied items food stuffs to Kabale and Itojo Hospitals and Kabale Nurses Training School.
  2. Whether there was a breach of contract arising out of non payment for the price.
  3. What damages are available to the Plaintiff if any.

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded UGX 73,155,650 being the contract price for foodstuffs and firewood delivered.
  • General damages of UGX 2,000,000 awarded for breach of contract.
  • Special damages of UGX 400,000 awarded for travel and accommodation expenses.
  • Interest at court rates awarded on the decretal sum from August 1991 until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Entitlement to Damages
Breach of contract in whatever form it may take always entitles the innocent party to maintain an action for damages, but it does not always discharge the contract.
Contract Law — Damages for Breach — Remoteness
In assessing damages for breach of contract, only such damages may be recovered as may fairly and reasonably be considered either as arising naturally from the breach according to the usual course of things, or as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract as the probable result of the breach.
Contract Law — Special Damages — Strict Proof Required
Special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved, including by production of supporting documentary evidence such as receipts.
Administrative Law — Government Contracts — Liability of Government
Where goods are delivered under valid contracts with government institutions and received by authorised officials, the government is liable for payment even where investigating authorities subsequently confiscate payment documents for inquiry.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Kyambadde v Mpigi District Administration ([1985] HCB 44)
  • Professor R Ssali v Isaya Besigye ([1978] HCB 188)
  • Hadley v. Baxendale (1849) 9 Exch 341

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Joram Turyagenda Kazunguza v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 488 of 1992) [1994] UGHC 117 (9 February 1994)
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.