Kyamuhunga Tea Co. Limited v Daks Couriers Limited (Civil Suit No. 862 of 2017)
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 freight forwarder who subcontracts transportation services without the client's written consent remains liable for breach when goods are lost in transit, notwithstanding any due diligence in selecting the subcontractor. The duty to deliver safely never leaves the original carrier. Where goods in transit are diverted from the approved route and cannot be traced, triggering customs penalties, the carrier is liable for both the value of the lost goods and the consequential penalties incurred by the consignor.
Outcome
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff with damages, interest and costs awarded
Facts
The plaintiff, a tea company, engaged the defendant freight forwarder to transport a consignment of tea valued at USD 49,700.16 from Uganda to Mombasa under a written agreement. The defendant collected the goods on 21 May 2017, loaded them on truck UAP 360X, then without the plaintiff's consent subcontracted the service to third parties. The consignment was transferred to truck UAZ 146B, cleared at Malaba border, but disappeared after entering Kenya and was never delivered. Kenya Revenue Authority concluded the goods had been dumped in Kenya and imposed a fine and VAT totalling KSh 895,636 (UGX 33,899,823), which the plaintiff was compelled to pay. The defendant failed to appear at trial and the matter proceeded exparte.
Issues
- Whether or not the defendant was in breach of the contract for forwarding and transportation services
- What remedies are available to the plaintiff for the breach
Orders
- Defendant to pay USD 49,700 or its current equivalent in Uganda Shillings
- Defendant to pay UGX 33,899,833
- General damages of UGX 50,000,000
- Interest on USD 49,700 at 6% per annum if in Dollars or 22% per annum if converted to Uganda Shillings from date of filing till payment in full
- Interest on UGX 33,899,833 at 22% per annum from date of filing till payment in full
- Interest on general damages at 6% per annum from date of judgment till payment in full
- Costs of the suit to the plaintiff
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- East African Community Customs Management Regulations 2010 Regulation 104(4)
- East African Community Customs Management Regulations 2010 Regulation 104(22)
- East African Community Customs Management Regulations 2010 Regulation 104(23)
Cases cited (7)
- Hajji Asuman Mutekanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1996)
- Kampala City Council vs Nakaye (1972) EA 446
- Gapco (U) Ltd v A. S Transporters Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2007)
- James Fredrick Nsubuga v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No. 13 of 1993)
- Erukana Kuwe v Isaac Patrick Matovu & Anor (High Court Civil Suit No. 177 of 2003)
- Kibimba Rice Ltd v Umar Salim (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1992)
- Harbutt's Plasticine Ltd vs Wayne Tank and Pump Co. Ltd [1970] QB 447
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.