Wakilii

Lubang Benedict, Olal Obong Andrew v Komakech Richard Ogaba (Civil Suit No. 37 Of 2006) (Civil Suit No. 37 of 2006)

High Court · [2008] UGHC 114 · 2008 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 recovery of money paid
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiffs for recovery of unrefunded purchase price with interest and costs

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 where a defendant admitted owing money but failed to appear at trial to controvert the plaintiffs' evidence, judgment would be entered for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were entitled to recover the unrefunded balance of the purchase price for a tractor never supplied. The court declined to award general damages where no evidence was led. Interest was awarded at the commercial rate of 22% per annum from the date the tractor was to be supplied, given that it was intended for commercial agricultural purposes. Plaintiffs were bound by their pleadings.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiffs for recovery of unrefunded purchase price with interest and costs

Facts

In September 2005, the plaintiffs paid UGX 13,500,000 in cash to the defendant for the purchase of a tractor to be supplied from the United Kingdom by December 2005. The defendant was a personal friend of the plaintiffs and undertook to supply the tractor through third party contacts. The tractor was never supplied. The defendant refunded UGX 5,500,000 to the first plaintiff, leaving a balance of UGX 8,000,000 unpaid. The plaintiffs claimed UGX 7,500,000 as the unrefunded balance and general damages. The defendant admitted owing money but disputed the amount. Though served with hearing notice, the defendant did not appear at trial and adduced no evidence. The tractor was intended for commercial agricultural purposes.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant breached the contract to supply a tractor to the plaintiffs.
  2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover the unrefunded balance of the purchase price.
  3. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to general damages.
  4. What rate of interest should apply to the sum awarded.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for both plaintiffs against the defendant for UGX 7,500,000 being the unrefunded balance of the purchase price.
  • Interest awarded at the commercial rate of 22% per annum on UGX 7,500,000 from 1st December 2005 until payment in full.
  • Plaintiffs awarded costs of the suit.
  • General damages refused for want of evidence.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Failure to Supply Goods — Recovery of Purchase Price
Where a defendant contracts to supply goods, receives payment, and fails to supply the goods or refund the full purchase price, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the unrefunded balance as damages for breach of contract.
Evidence — Burden of Proof — Uncontroverted Evidence — Acceptance by Court
Where a defendant admits owing money in the written statement of defence but fails to appear at trial to controvert the plaintiff's evidence, the court will accept the plaintiff's uncontroverted evidence and enter judgment accordingly.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Bound by Pleadings — Amendment
A party is bound by the pleadings as filed and served. Where the evidence at trial reveals a higher amount than claimed in the unamended plaint, the court will limit recovery to the amount pleaded and served on the defendant.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Proof Required
General damages cannot be awarded where no evidence is led to prove the claim for such damages.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Commercial Rate — Commercial Purpose
Where a breach of contract relates to goods intended for commercial purposes, it is fair and appropriate to award interest at the commercial rate on the sum due, running from the date the goods were to be supplied until payment in full.

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Lubang Benedict, Olal Obong Andrew v Komakech Richard Ogaba (Civil Suit No. 37 Of 2006) (Civil Suit No. 37 of 2006) [2008] UGHC 114 (27 November 2008)
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.