Wakilii

Musoke v Merger Technical Services Uganda Limited (Civil Suit 426 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGCOMMC 21 · 2023 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 outstanding payment, heard ex parte after defendant failed to file defence
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff for outstanding contractual sum, general damages, interest and costs

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 that a valid contract for survey services existed between the parties based on exchange of consideration and performance, despite the absence of a written agreement. The defendant breached the contract by failing to pay the outstanding balance of UGX 66,000,000. The court awarded the plaintiff the outstanding principal sum, general damages of UGX 20,000,000 for inconvenience and reputational harm, interest at 12% per annum from date of filing suit, and costs.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff for outstanding contractual sum, general damages, interest and costs

Facts

In 2017, the defendant company engaged the plaintiff, a surveyor, to carry out survey works to demarcate pathways for erection of electric poles along roads in Kayunga District under an IDBIII project. The plaintiff completed all contracted survey works in 2019, including extra work, totalling UGX 272,571,118.99. The defendant made partial payments leaving an outstanding balance of UGX 95,000,000. In November 2019, the defendant acknowledged the debt in writing to an LC1 court when the plaintiff's employees complained of unpaid wages. The defendant made further payments in December 2019 (reducing the balance to UGX 86,000,000) and in September 2021 (UGX 20,000,000), leaving an outstanding balance of UGX 66,000,000. Despite demand notices and notice of intention to sue, the defendant failed to pay the balance or file a defence. The court proceeded ex parte and entered default judgment on 20 October 2022.

Issues

  1. Whether there was a contract for services between the Plaintiff and the Defendant?
  2. Whether there was breach of contract by the Defendant?
  3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding balance from the defendant?
  4. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought?

Orders

  • There was a contract of service between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
  • The Defendant breached the contract of service.
  • The Plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding balance of UGX 66,000,000.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded General Damages of UGX 20,000,000.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded interest of 12% on UGX 66,000,000 from the date of filing the suit to payment in full.
  • The Plaintiff is awarded costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Formation — Informal Contracts — Exchange of Consideration
A valid contract may be inferred from the conduct of parties where there is exchange of consideration and performance by both parties, even in the absence of a written agreement, unless the subject matter exceeds twenty-five currency points and one party disputes the existence of the contract.
Contract Law — Breach — Failure to Pay — Proof of Breach
Where a defendant acknowledges indebtedness in correspondence and makes partial payments, such conduct constitutes evidence both of the existence of a contract and of breach by failure to pay the remaining balance due.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Failure to File Defence — Liquidated Demands
Where a defendant fails to file a defence in a suit for a liquidated demand, the court may pass judgment for any sum not exceeding the sum claimed together with interest at the specified rate or 8% per annum if no rate is specified, pursuant to Order 9 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Failure to File Defence — Constructive Admission
Failure to file a defence is a presumption of constructive admission of the allegations in the plaint, and the allegations must be taken as the truth.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Breach of Contract — Inconvenience and Reputational Harm
General damages are recoverable for inconvenience suffered as a result of breach of contract, including embarrassment to personal and business reputation caused by being dragged to a local council court by unpaid employees due to the defendant's failure to pay contractual sums owed.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (7)

  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
  • Dr Vicent Karuhanga v NIC and URA (2008) ULR 666
  • Mogas (U) Ltd v Benzima (U) Ltd (HCCS No. 88 of 2013)
  • Sylar Kakugu Tumwesigyire v Trans Sahara International General TRDG LLC (HCT-00-CC-CS-0095 of 2005)
  • Stroms v Hutchinson [1905] AC 515
  • Premchandra Shenoi & Anor v Maximov Oleg Petrovich (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2003)
  • SIETCO v Noble Builders (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 31 of 1995)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Musoke v Merger Technical Services Uganda Limited (Civil Suit 426 of 2022) [2023] UGCommC 21 (19 September 2023)
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.