Wakilii

Kiiza Ssemberege v Motor Centre E.A. Ltd (Civil Suit No. 369 of 2011)

High Court · [2015] UGCOMMC 98 · 2015 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of money with dispute referred to joint auditors under section 27(c) of the Judicature Act
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff for UGX 47,710,000 plus 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 court enforced an auditor's award under section 27(c) of the Judicature Act determining that the defendant owed the plaintiff UGX 47,710,000. Interest was awarded at 19% per annum from November 2011 to judgment, with further interest at 19% per annum on the aggregate sum from judgment until payment in full. No separate damages were awarded as interest adequately compensates the plaintiff under the principle of restitutio in integrum. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff for UGX 47,710,000 plus interest and costs

Facts

The plaintiff sued the defendant for UGX 59,026,000 arising from alleged transactions between 12 February 2009 and 21 June 2011. The court referred the dispute to joint auditors under section 27(c) of the Judicature Act. The auditors were tasked with reconciling accounts based on the claim and determining which party owed money to the other. The first two auditors filed a partial reconciliation agreeing on UGX 6,056,000 owed to the plaintiff but disagreed on the rest. A third auditor, Felbright & Co., was appointed by the Registrar and completed the reconciliation, determining that the plaintiff was owed UGX 47,710,000 in total. The suit was filed on 4 October 2011.

Issues

  1. What amount is owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff following reconciliation by auditors?
  2. What rate of interest should be awarded on the principal sum?
  3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to general damages in addition to interest?
  4. Who should bear the costs of the suit?

Orders

  • The Plaintiff is entitled to payment of Uganda shillings 47,710,000/= by the Defendant.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded interest at 19% per annum from November 2011 till the date of judgment.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded additional interest on the aggregate sum at date of judgment comprising of his dues together with interest awarded prior to judgment at the rate of 19% per annum from the date of judgment till payment in full.
  • Costs are awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Reference to Auditors — Section 27(c) Judicature Act — Enforcement as Judgment
An auditor's report filed under section 27(c) of the Judicature Act constitutes an award enforceable as a judgment of the court.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Discretion of Court — Civil Procedure Act Section 26(2)
The power to award interest under section 26(2) of the Civil Procedure Act is discretionary and the court must determine what constitutes a reasonable rate of interest for a commercial transaction.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Nature and Purpose — Compensatory Principle
Interest represents compensation for the loss suffered by a creditor through deprivation of the use of money at the due date, either as profit that might have been made or loss suffered through not having that use.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Assessment of Rate — Borrowing Rate Principle
In assessing interest, the loss is measured at the rate at which the plaintiff would have had to borrow money to supply the place of that which was withheld by the defendant.
Damages & Quantum — Restitutio in Integrum — Relationship Between Interest and Damages
An award of interest is compensatory and fulfils the purpose of an award of damages under the principle of restitutio in integrum; where there is a claim for money, it is not necessary to also award general damages for the purpose of restoring the plaintiff.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (2)

  • Riches v Westminster Bank Ltd [1947] 1 All ER 469
  • Tate & Lyle Food and Distribution Ltd v Greater London Council [1981] 3 All ER 716

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kiiza Ssemberege v Motor Centre E.A. Ltd (Civil Suit No. 369 of 2011) [2015] UGCommC 98 (28 August 2015)
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.