Revolutionary Ads & Desidgnes Ltd v Registered Trustees of Nakivubo Memorial Stadium (High Court Civil Suit No. 73 of 2009)
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 plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant breached the advertising agreement by allowing other companies to advertise without consent. The defendant was not barred from collecting rent from existing contracts under the agreement. The plaintiff failed to pay rent as agreed, rendering itself in breach. Judgment entered for the defendant on the counterclaim for rent arrears of UGX 83,000,000 with interest. Plaintiff's suit dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed. Defendant awarded UGX 83,000,000 in rent arrears with interest.
Facts
The plaintiff and defendant entered into a three-year agreement on 7 December 2005 for the plaintiff to run advertising services at Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium, with exclusive rights to advertising space in exchange for annual rent of UGX 45 million. The plaintiff was to collect advertising fees from companies and pay rent to the defendant. The agreement accounted for existing advertising contracts, with 50% of collections to be offset against the first year's rent. The plaintiff failed to pay rent according to the agreed schedule, paying only UGX 8 million in 2006 and UGX 7 million in 2007. The plaintiff alleged the defendant breached the contract by allowing other companies to advertise without consent and collecting advertising fees directly. The defendant terminated the contract on 1 December 2008 and counterclaimed for rent arrears of UGX 83 million. The plaintiff claimed financial loss of UGX 140.5 million due to the defendant's alleged breach.
Issues
- Whether there was a breach of contract and if so by whom.
- Whether the landlord permitted other clients to advertise on the premises without the plaintiff's consent and if so, whether this was in breach of the contract.
- Whether the plaintiff is liable to pay rent arrears during the subsistence of the contract.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Plaintiff's suit dismissed with costs.
- Judgment entered for the defendant on the counterclaim for UGX 83,000,000 in rent arrears.
- Interest awarded at 14% per annum on rent arrears from date of filing suit until judgment.
- Interest awarded at 8% per annum on decreed sum from date of judgment until payment in full.
- Each party to bear its own costs of the counterclaim.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (9)
- Reardon v Smith Line and Hansen Tangen [1976] WLR 995
- Bank Uganda Ltd v Translink Uganda Ltd (Supreme Court CA No. 5 of 2004)
- John Nagenda v Sabena Belgian World Airlines (Civil Suit No. 1148 of 1998)
- Hadley v Baxendale [1843-60] All ER 461
- Karshe v UTC Ltd [1967] EA 256
- Uganda Wholesalers Ltd v Impex House Ltd [1971] HCB 245
- Clough v London & North Western Railway Ltd (1871) LR 7 Exch 26
- Peyman v Lanjani [1984] 3 All ER 703
- Dr Margaret Basaza v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 185 of 1997)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.