Wakilii

Kagimu v Bazira (Civil Suit No. 470 of 2011)

High Court · [2012] UGHC 80 · 2012 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 and negligence following default judgment
Decision
Defendant evicted from premises; ordered to pay general damages, repair costs, and mesne profits to Plaintiff

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 a tenant who effects major unauthorised modifications causing extensive damage to leased premises without landlord consent is liable in negligence and breach of contract. Court awarded general damages for both negligence and breach, repair costs assessed by quantity surveyor, mesne profits, eviction order, interest at court rate, and costs to the landlord.

Outcome

Defendant evicted from premises; ordered to pay general damages, repair costs, and mesne profits to Plaintiff

Facts

The Plaintiff, registered proprietor of two residential houses on Plots 537 and 538 at Wagaba Zone, Kabuusu, executed a tenancy agreement with the Defendant on 12 June 2009. Monthly rent was UGX 1,000,000 per house payable three months in advance. The Plaintiff allowed the Defendant to retain four months' rent to effect minor repairs (painting and ceiling replacement). Without approval, the Defendant effected major modifications: breaking walls, removing doors, leaving holes in roofs, removing tiles, building internal walls, converting bedrooms to toilets, constructing wooden huts in the compound, and turning the premises into lodges for prostitutes. The Defendant also defaulted on rent payments, issued bounced cheques, and ignored notices to vacate. Default judgment was obtained on 13 March 2012 after the Defendant failed to file a defence.

Issues

  1. Whether the Defendant was negligent in effecting major modifications on the two suit premises.
  2. Whether the Defendant breached the contract.
  3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought in the plaint.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay general damages for negligence at UGX 5,000,000.
  • Defendant to pay general damages for breach of contract at UGX 5,000,000.
  • Defendant to pay UGX 146,118,500 for repairs to restore the premises to tenantable state.
  • Defendant to be evicted from the suit premises immediately.
  • Defendant to pay mesne profits at UGX 8,000,000 subsequent to eviction.
  • Interest at court rate from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach — Tenant's Obligation to Pay Rent — Default Beyond Grace Period
A breach of contract occurs where one or both parties fail to fulfil the obligations imposed by the terms of the contract. A tenant who fails to pay rent according to the agreed terms, including beyond any stipulated grace period, is in breach of the tenancy agreement.
Tort Law — Negligence — Duty of Care — Tenant's Duty to Landlord
Negligence arises where the Defendant who owes a duty of care to the Plaintiff breaches that duty of care. A tenant owes a duty of care to the landlord with respect to the leased premises and is liable in negligence for unauthorised extensive modifications causing damage.
Contract Law — Damages for Breach — Remoteness — Hadley v Baxendale Rule
Damages for breach of contract should be such as may fairly and reasonably be considered either arising naturally according to the usual course of things from such breach, or such 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.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment — Reasonableness
General damages is that which Court may award without pointing out any measure by which they are to be assessed, basing on the opinion and judgment of a reasonable man. The court will moderate claimed damages to a just and fair sum in the circumstances.
Land & Property — Landlord and Tenant — Mesne Profits — Unpaid Rent
Mesne profits are those which the person in wrongful possession of property actually received or ought to have received with ordinary diligence, together with interest on such profits. Unpaid rent constitutes mesne profits.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Formal Proof — Quantum
Where default judgment has been entered, the matter proceeds to formal proof on quantum. Expert evidence, including quantity surveyor assessment of repair costs, constitutes reasonable evidence of damages caused to property.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (7)

  • Nakawa Trading Company Limited v Coffee Marketing Board (HCCS No. 137 of 1991)
  • Hajji Asuman Mutekanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd (SCCA No. 7 of 1995)
  • Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562
  • Kabona Brothers Agencies v Uganda Metal Products & Enamelling Company Limited (1981) HCB 74
  • Hedley v Baxendale (184301860) ALLER 461
  • Osofraco Limited v The Attorney General [2002] KALR 519
  • Clifton Securities Limited v Huntley & Others [1948] 1 All ER 283

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kagimu v Bazira (Civil Suit No. 470 of 2011) [2012] UGHC 80 (27 April 2012)
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.