Wakilii

Mona Stella Kijunju v Harrison Busingye and Another (Civil Suit 156 of 2021)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 253 · 2026 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of purchase price arising from sale of goods contract
Decision
Plaintiff's claim for recovery of purchase price dismissed

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

Plaintiff claimed USD 40,000 for sale of a brick-making machine under a Memorandum of Understanding. Defendants alleged the machine was defective and unfit for purpose. Court held that plaintiff failed to prove delivery of a functional machine in accordance with the contract. Plaintiff's own admissions showed she was notified of defects and her technician failed to remedy them. Defendants were entitled to reject the machine and rescind the contract under Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act provisions. Property did not pass to defendants. Suit dismissed.

Outcome

Plaintiff's claim for recovery of purchase price dismissed

Facts

Plaintiff and second defendant entered into Memorandum of Understanding dated 3 November 2020 for sale of brick-making machine at USD 40,000. Machine delivered to Special Forces Command yard at Mpala, Entebbe on or about 6 November 2020. Agreement required plaintiff to provide expert technician for installation and payment within forty working days of delivery. Defendants alleged machine was defective and non-functional despite installation attempts by plaintiff's technician Brian, defendants' engineers, and UPDF Engineering Brigade personnel. Plaintiff notified of defects and meeting held at Kabira Country Club to resolve issue. Defendants terminated contract by letter dated 14 June 2021 and requested plaintiff collect machine. Plaintiff refused to collect machine, maintaining it was in good working condition, and sued for purchase price.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff.
  2. What remedies are available to the plaintiff?

Orders

  • Suit dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Sale of Goods — Defective Goods — Fitness for Purpose
Where a seller undertakes to supply and install a machine, delivery is not complete upon physical placement alone; the seller must prove the machine was delivered, installed, and made operational in accordance with the agreement before property passes to the buyer.
Sale of Goods — Implied Conditions — Satisfactory Quality
Under Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act s.15(2) and (3), there is an implied condition that goods supplied are reasonably fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality where the seller sells goods in the course of business and the buyer relies on the seller's skill and judgment.
Sale of Goods — Rejection of Defective Goods — Buyer's Right
A buyer who is supplied with defective goods that do not conform to the contract is entitled to reject the goods and rescind the contract under Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act s.48, and is not bound to return rejected goods to the seller under s.44.
Burden of Proof — Performance of Contract
In a suit for recovery of purchase price, the plaintiff bears the burden to prove due performance of contractual obligations on a balance of probabilities; failure to discharge this burden entitles the defendant to succeed.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mona Stella Kijunju v Harrison Busingye and Another (Civil Suit 156 of 2021) [2026] UGHCCD 253 (27 July 2026)
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.