Wakilii

Nantume Kizige v Nile Computers (HCT-00-CC-CA 498 of 2004)

High Court · [2008] UGCOMMC 25 · 2008 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of unpaid balance for computers sold
Decision
Plaintiff's claim reduced to value of functional computers only; Defendant entitled to reject non-conforming goods

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

In a suit for recovery of unpaid balance for second-hand computers, held that where goods sold were required to be in good and working condition but the buyer had no opportunity to inspect them before delivery due to customs sealing, the buyer was entitled to examine the goods under Sale of Goods Act s.34 before acceptance. Where 277 of 543 computers supplied had faults, the buyer was not in breach for refusing full payment. Plaintiff entitled only to payment for functional computers valued at UGX 78,172,594.

Outcome

Plaintiff's claim reduced to value of functional computers only; Defendant entitled to reject non-conforming goods

Facts

On 25 March 2003, the Plaintiff agreed to sell 543 second-hand computers with accessories to the Defendant company for UGX 110,000,000. The agreement recited that the purchaser had inspected the goods and found them in good and working condition, but both parties admitted this was not complied with. One day after signing, the container was sealed by Uganda Revenue Authority for just over a week. When unsealed, the Defendant brought technicians to test the computers and took delivery. Two months later, the Defendant complained that 277 computers had faults. The Defendant paid UGX 50,000,000 initially, then UGX 8,000,000, and during trial paid a further UGX 20,000,000, totaling UGX 78,000,000. The Defendant's evidence showed 150 defective computers could be made functional by swapping parts, leaving 127 computers and 27 monitors completely non-functional. The packing list showed only 394 of 760 computers in the container had CD ROMs.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff supplied 543 computers complete with keyboards, mice, cables and CD ROMS.
  2. Whether the Defendant is in breach of the contract.
  3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay UGX 78,172,594 (if not yet fully paid) being the value of computers conforming to the contract.
  • Interest awarded at 22% per annum from the date of filing suit until payment in full.
  • No damages awarded.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Sale of Goods — Quality and Description — Second-Hand Goods
Where a contract for sale of second-hand computers provides that goods must be in good and working condition, the goods must meet that contractual standard; failure to supply goods conforming to that description constitutes breach under Sale of Goods Act sections 15 and 16.
Sale of Goods — Buyer's Right of Examination
Under Sale of Goods Act section 34, where goods are delivered to a buyer who has not previously examined them, the buyer is not deemed to have accepted them until given a reasonable opportunity to examine them to ascertain whether they conform to the contract.
Sale of Goods — Acceptance and Payment — Defective Goods
A buyer is entitled to pay only for goods which conform to the contract; where a substantial portion of goods supplied are defective and do not meet the contractual standard of quality and fitness for purpose, the buyer may refuse payment for the non-conforming goods.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Sale of Goods Act s.15
  • Sale of Goods Act s.16
  • Sale of Goods Act s.34

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nantume Kizige v Nile Computers (HCT-00-CC-CA 498 of 2004) [2008] UGCommC 25 (6 April 2008)
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.