Wakilii

Kyarimpa v Nassozi (Civil Suit No. 0794 of 2016)

High Court · [2017] UGHCLD 91 · 2017 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for specific performance and damages heard ex parte following defendant's failure to appear
Decision
Defendant ordered to specifically perform contractual obligations to process title and change user rights; Plaintiff awarded general damages

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 found the defendant vendor in breach of a land sale agreement for failing to process title for an additional unregistered plot and to obtain consent for change of land user from residential to commercial. The court ordered specific performance of these obligations and awarded general damages of UGX 50,000,000 for breach, but refused to order eviction of occupants or mesne profits, holding that the purchaser's equitable interest did not entitle her to possession until full payment of the purchase price.

Outcome

Defendant ordered to specifically perform contractual obligations to process title and change user rights; Plaintiff awarded general damages

Facts

On 19 April 2013, the plaintiff and defendant entered a sale agreement for land comprised in FRV 890 Folio 14, Plot 449 Busiro Block 425 (0.171 hectares) plus an additional unregistered 0.12 acres, for UGX 240,000,000. The plaintiff paid UGX 100,000,000 at execution and received the certificate of title for the registered portion. Under the agreement, the defendant undertook to process title for the additional 0.12 acres and obtain consent to change land user from residential to commercial. The plaintiff paid additional sums (USD 1,000 and allegedly USD 10,000) to facilitate title processing. Despite reminders, the defendant failed to process the title for the unregistered plot or seek consent for change of user. The defendant did not appear to defend the suit, and the matter proceeded ex parte.

Issues

  1. Whether or not the Defendant is in breach of the sale agreement entered into with the Plaintiff for the suit property comprised in Freehold Register Volume 890 Folio 14 Plot 449 Busiro Block 425 measuring approximately 0.171 hectares with an additional area of 0.12 acres dated 19th April 2013.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The Defendant is in breach of the terms of the contract for the sale of the suit property comprised in Freehold Register Volume 890 Folio 14 Plot 449 Busiro Block 425 measuring approximately 0.171 hectares and an additional area of 0.12 acres of unregistered land.
  • The Defendant is hereby ordered to specifically perform her obligations under the contract.
  • The Plaintiff is granted UGX 50,000,000 (fifty million only) as general damages for breach of the contract.
  • The Plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Vendor's Failure to Fulfill Obligations Under Sale Agreement
Where parties enter a valid contract for the sale of land and one party fails to perform obligations expressly undertaken in the agreement, that party is in breach of contract and the innocent party is entitled to a remedy.
Contract Law — Specific Performance — Entitlement Where Party in Breach Can Perform
Under section 64 of the Contracts Act 2010, a party may obtain specific performance of a contract where the party in breach is able to perform, and specific performance would not produce undue hardship, infringe third party rights, or be disproportionate to the benefit to the claimant.
Land & Property — Equitable Interest — Purchaser's Interest Under Valid but Part-Performed Contract
The moment there is a valid contract for sale of land, the vendor becomes in equity a trustee for the purchaser and beneficial ownership passes to the purchaser, but the vendor retains a right to possession until the full purchase price is paid, in the absence of express agreement as to time of delivery of possession.
Land & Property — Mesne Profits — Wrongful Possession as Prerequisite
Mesne profits are profits which a person in wrongful possession of property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received, but a claim for mesne profits requires that the defendant be in wrongful possession as against the plaintiff; where a vendor retains lawful possession pending full payment under a contract, mesne profits are not available to the purchaser.
Contract Law — Damages for Breach — General Damages for Loss of Commercial Prospects
General damages for breach of contract include compensation for loss of profit, physical inconvenience, mental distress, pain and suffering that are the direct probable consequence of the breach; where a vendor's breach delays a purchaser's commercial use of land for several years, general damages are recoverable as fair compensation.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (10)

  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
  • William Kasozi v DFCU Bank Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 1326 of 2000)
  • Ronald Kasibante v Shell Uganda Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 542 of 2006)
  • Lysaght v Edwards (1876) 2 Ch D 499
  • George Kasedde Mukasa v Emmanuel Wambedde & 4 Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 459 of 1998)
  • Elliott v Boynton [1924] 1 Ch 236 (CA)
  • Busiro Coffee Farmers & Dealers Ltd v Tom Kayongo & 2 Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 532 of 1992)
  • Storms v Hutchison [1905] AC 515
  • Assist (U) Ltd v Italian Asphalt and Haulage & Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 1291 of 1999)
  • Haji Asuman Mutekanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1995)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kyarimpa Vs Nassozi (Civil Suit No. 0794 of 2016) [2017] UGHCLD 91 (27 November 2017)
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.