Wakilii

Lwasa v Busulwa & Another (Civil Suit 595 of 2022)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 193 · 2024 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 fraud arising from failed land sale agreements
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with damages and costs awarded against defendants jointly and severally

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (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 1 time 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

The court found the defendants breached a land sale agreement by failing to deliver title and vacant possession after receiving full payment of UGX 15,000,000 for 10 acres, and that the defendants fraudulently represented they had interest in land they did not own. The plaintiff was awarded compensation of the purchase price plus interest and general damages.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with damages and costs awarded against defendants jointly and severally

Facts

In December 2018, the plaintiff entered into an agreement to purchase land from the defendants at Kakindu, Entebbe. The defendants represented that they owned land comprised in Busiro Block 417-418 Plots 1 and 2 and that their title was being processed. After the initial agreement dated 22nd December 2018, the plaintiff made multiple payments totalling over UGX 15,000,000. On 17th December 2020, the parties executed a fresh agreement acknowledging receipt of UGX 15,000,000 for the sale of 10 acres. The agreement required the defendants to deliver a certificate of title within 6 months and grant vacant possession. The defendants failed to deliver either the title or vacant possession. The plaintiff's inquiries revealed that the defendants had no interest in the land, which actually belonged to other parties including the Kampala Arc Diocese. Despite the full payment, the defendants never fulfilled their contractual obligations.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendants are guilty of breach of contract?
  2. Whether the defendants are guilty of fraud?
  3. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • An award for compensation of the purchase price of UGX 15,000,000 (fifteen million Ugandan shillings) at an interest rate of 10% annually from the date of signing of the sales agreement (17th December 2020) till payment in full against the defendants.
  • Plaintiff awarded general damages of UGX 10,000,000 (ten million Ugandan shillings) at an interest rate of 10% annually from the date of this judgement till payment in full against the defendants.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Breach of Contract — Definition and Elements
A breach of contract occurs when one party fails to carry out a term of the contract, neglects, refuses or fails to perform any part of its bargain or any term of the contract without a legitimate legal excuse, and the innocent party is entitled to a remedy.
Breach of Contract — Failure to Deliver Title and Possession in Land Sale
Where a vendor undertakes by contract to deliver a certificate of title and vacant possession of land within a specified time and fails to do so after receiving full payment, the vendor is in breach of the sales agreement and the purchaser is entitled to damages.
Fraud — False Representation of Interest in Land
Fraud consists of an intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another to part with valuable property. Where vendors falsely represent they have interest in land and induce a purchaser to pay consideration with no intention or capacity to perform the contract, they are guilty of fraud.
Contractual Damages — Compensation for Breach
Under the Contracts Act 2010 section 61, where there is a breach of contract, the party who suffers the breach is entitled to receive compensation for any loss or damage caused, with the primary purpose being to offer the promisee the value of performance.
Expert Evidence — Valuation Evidence — Need for Supporting Documentation
Expert valuation evidence must be supported by a valuation report detailing the methodology, factors considered, and basis for conclusions. Where a valuer provides oral testimony without a supporting report showing how property was inspected and valued, the court may reject the evidence as insufficiently substantiated.
Special Damages — Strict Proof Required
Special damages must be strictly proved with evidence showing particularity in accordance with the pleadings and precise calculation to enable defendants to assess the facts making such calculation. Where a plaintiff claims special damages but does not strictly prove them, the claim will not be granted.
General Damages — Compensation for Loss
A plaintiff who suffers damages due to the wrongful act of the defendant must be put in the position he or she would have been if he or she had not suffered the wrong. General damages are awarded to compensate for actual loss and suffering occasioned by the defendant's conduct.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (10)

  • Kabagambe Mathias v Kahire Nobert (High Court Civil Suit No. 389 of 2016)
  • Nakawa Trading Co. Ltd v Coffee Marketing Board (Civil Suit No. 137 of 1991)
  • Fredrick JK Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd and 5 Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
  • Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited v Hajji Yahya Sekalega (Civil Suit No. 185 of 2009)
  • Dr. Henry Kamanyiro Kakembo v Roko Construction Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 05 of 2005)
  • Namatovu Margarey v Tom Kaaya and Another (Civil Suit No. 432 of 2005)
  • Aya Investment (U) Ltd v Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa (Miscellaneous Application No. 2908 of 2023)
  • Mugabi John v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 133 of 2002)
  • Ahmed El Termewy v Hassan Awdi and Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 95 of 2012)
  • Charles Acire v Myaana Engola (High Court Civil Suit No. 143 of 1993)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

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.

Lwasa_v_Busulwa_&_Another_(Civil_Suit_595_of_2022)_[2024]_UGHCLD_193_(25_July_2024)
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.