Nakagwa v Tulsa Investments Limited (Civil Suit 978 of 2022)
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
Where a plaintiff paid UGX 120,000,000 for the supply of goods under a contract and the defendant neither supplied the goods nor refunded the money, the court held that the defendant breached the contract. The plaintiff was entitled to recovery of the full contractual amount, interest at 18% per annum from filing, and general damages of UGX 5,000,000 for inconvenience and psychological anguish suffered due to the breach.
Outcome
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff; Defendant to pay contractual sum, interest, general damages and costs
Facts
The Plaintiff approached the Defendant and entered into a contract for the supply of Adseter Stickers, a paper product. Between September and November 2021, the Plaintiff made payments totaling UGX 120,000,000 to the Defendant on various dates (17th, 20th, 21st, 22nd September 2021, 20th October 2021, and 11th November 2021). Payment was evidenced by five receipts. The Defendant failed to supply the goods as agreed and did not refund the money. The Defendant did not file a Written Statement of Defence despite being served by substituted service. Interlocutory judgment was entered and the matter proceeded exparte for formal proof.
Issues
- Whether there was a breach of contract to supply and or deliver goods to the plaintiff by the defendant?
- Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought?
Orders
- The Defendant to pay the Plaintiff the contractual amount of UGX 120,000,000.
- Interest awarded on the above amount at 18% per annum from the date of filing this suit till payment in full.
- The Defendant to pay the Plaintiffs UGX 5,000,000 as general damages.
- Costs of the suit to the Plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (5)
- Yoswa Kityo v Eriya Kaddu [1982] HCB 58
- United Building Services Ltd v Yafesi Muzira T/A Quickest Builders and Co [2006] UGCommC 15
- Akware Caroline Osilo v Gaaga Enterprises Ltd (HCCS No. 271 of 2011)
- Uganda Revenue Authority v Stephen Mabosi (SCCA No. 1 of 1996)
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.