Wakilii

Namukasa v EKM Limited & Another (Civil Suit No. 804 of 2016)

High Court · [2020] UGHCLD 11 · 2020 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of tenancy and recovery of goods
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with awards totalling UGX 20,000,000 plus 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 court held that the landlord's termination of the tenancy without statutory notice after receiving rent was unlawful. The plaintiff was entitled to compensation for lost goods and lost profits, but not to the excessive amounts claimed. The court awarded special damages of UGX 10,000,000 for goods lost, UGX 6,000,000 for lost profits over six months, and general damages of UGX 4,000,000 for pain, suffering and inconvenience caused by the unlawful termination.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff with awards totalling UGX 20,000,000 plus costs

Facts

The plaintiff rented commercial premises from the defendants at Plot 38 William Street, Kampala from 2001 at UGX 1,500,000 monthly rent. On 14 July 2013, she paid rent for July 2013 but found the premises locked by the defendants. She received a notice to vacate on 11 August 2013, requiring her to leave by 31 August 2013. On 27 August 2013, a neighbour informed her that goods worth UGX 45,045,800 had been removed from the premises. The plaintiff claimed the defendants unlawfully terminated the tenancy and failed to return her goods, causing her business losses. The defendants contended that the plaintiff breached the tenancy by failing to pay rent and that the parties mutually agreed to vacation, with goods listed for collection which the plaintiff never retrieved. The defendants did not appear at trial to give evidence.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff's removal from the premises was unlawful.
  2. Whether the items listed on the written statement of defence were the only items in the Plaintiff's shop.
  3. What remedies are available to the Plaintiff.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendants.
  • Special damages of UGX 10,000,000 awarded for the value of goods.
  • Special damages of UGX 6,000,000 awarded for lost profits (UGX 1,000,000 per month for 6 months).
  • General damages of UGX 4,000,000 awarded.
  • Costs awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Landlord and Tenant — Termination of Tenancy — Statutory Notice Requirement
In landlord-tenant relationships, there is an implied term that 30 days' notice must be given in lieu of the termination of any tenancy, and it is unlawful for a landlord to receive rent and then close the tenant's premises without giving the statutory notice.
Breach of Contract — Landlord-Tenant Relationship
A landlord-tenant relationship is contractual in nature, and a landlord who unlawfully terminates the tenancy is liable for breach of contract.
Special Damages — Proof Requirements — Lost Goods
A plaintiff claiming special damages for lost goods must provide specific proof beyond oral testimony, but where defendants acknowledge certain items in their pleadings, the court may rely on such acknowledgment to assess the value of goods.
Lost Profits — Assessment on Reasonable Commercial Basis
Where a business has been unlawfully closed, the court will assess lost profits on a reasonable commercial basis, considering minimum business profitability rather than accepting inflated or unsubstantiated claims.
General Damages — Unlawful Termination of Tenancy
General damages are awarded to compensate for pain, suffering and inconvenience resulting from unlawful termination of a tenancy and breach of its terms, assessed proportionately to the subject matter and circumstances of the case.

Cases cited (1)

  • Ritex International Forex Bureau Ltd v Haba Group Ltd (HCCS No. 219 of 2012)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Namukasa_v_EKM_Limited_&_Another_(Civil_Suit_No._804_of_2016)_[2020]_UGHCLD_11_(13_March_2020)
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.