Wakilii

Nabco Enterprises Uganda Ltd v Registered Trustees of Jesuit (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 2018)

Court of Appeal · [2021] UGCA 129 · 2021 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First civil appeal from a High Court (Commercial Division) judgment dismissing a claim for breach of a construction agreement
Decision
Appeal dismissed; trial court's dismissal of the appellant's breach of contract claim upheld

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 6 (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 6 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Citations rising — 8 citing cases on record, 6 in the most recent three data years. 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 of Appeal, on a first appeal re-evaluating the evidence, upheld the trial court's finding that the contractor appellant breached the construction contract by supplying defective iron sheets which it failed to rectify. The court accepted the independent UNBS test showing the sheets failed standards over the supplier's report and the expert's 'afterthought' explanation that defects were due to age. It held the appellant, not the respondent, breached the solar panel obligation. On VAT, it held the respondent's educational-services exemption did not extend to supply of hydroform blocks, and the appellant failed to prove a VAT refund. Having failed on all grounds, the appellant was not entitled to damages or costs. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; trial court's dismissal of the appellant's breach of contract claim upheld

Facts

The appellant building contractor entered into a contract on 20 May 2013 with the respondent, a Catholic nonprofit trustee, to construct a classroom block at Ocer Campion Jesuit College, Gulu. Disagreements arose over iron sheets used for roofing, which the respondent said were peeling and should be replaced. The appellant's supplier, Uganda Baati, found scratches from mishandling that could be remedied by painting. The respondent refused to pay for the iron sheets, contracted another supplier to install solar panels (alleged to be part of the appellant's work), and withheld VAT. Three assessment reports were obtained: a Uganda Baati report, a first UNBS test (basic parameters, no defect found), and a second UNBS test conducted independently in Gulu finding the sheets failed bend, appearance, impact, chemical resistance and zinc-aluminium tests. The appellant sued for the cost of iron sheets, solar panel installation costs and withheld VAT. The trial court dismissed the claim, ordering each party to bear own costs. The appellant appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial Judge properly evaluated the evidence in finding that the iron sheets supplied by the appellant were defective and that the appellant breached the construction contract.
  2. Whether the trial Judge erred in disregarding the expert evidence of DW3.
  3. Whether the appellant or the respondent breached the obligation to install solar panels.
  4. Whether the respondent was liable to pay VAT on the supply of hydroform blocks and machine hire.
  5. Whether the appellant was entitled to general damages, interest and costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs here and in the lower court.

Rules and key headnotes

Appeals — First Appeal — Duty to Re-evaluate Evidence
On a first appeal the court is under a duty to reappraise the evidence and draw inferences of fact, while cautioning itself that it did not see the witnesses give testimony first hand.
Breach of Contract — Defective Performance — Supply of Defective Goods
A breach of contract occurs where a party fails to perform any term, including failure to perform to industry standards or the requirements of an express or implied warranty; supplying defective materials which the supplier fails to rectify constitutes a breach.
Expert Evidence — Weight and Reliability — Independence of Testing
The reliability of an assessment report depends on the independence of sampling and the test parameters applied; an expert's explanation that defects arose from the age of materials may be rejected where it was not reflected in the contemporaneous assessment report and amounts to an afterthought.
Value Added Tax — Exempt Supplies — Scope of Education Services Exemption
Under section 19 and the Second Schedule of the VAT Act, the VAT exemption for education services does not extend to the supply of other goods or services, such as hydroform blocks and machine hire, which fall outside the Second Schedule.
Costs — Costs Follow the Event — Unsuccessful Appellant
Where an appellant fails on all grounds of appeal, the appeal will be dismissed with costs both in the appellate court and the lower court.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (7)

  • Pandya v R [1957] EA 336
  • Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
  • Coghlan v Cumberland (1898) 1 Ch. 704
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi (2002) 1 EA 305
  • Ahimbisibwe v Akright Projects Ltd (Civil Suit No. 832 of 2007)
  • Stanbic Bank v Sekalega (Civil Suit No. 185 of 2009)
  • Uganda Development Bank v Muganga Construction Company LTD (1981) HCB 35

Cases citing this judgment (6)

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.

Nabco Enterprises Uganda Ltd v Registered Trustees of Jesuit (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 2018) [2021] UGCA 129 (12 March 2021)
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.