Wakilii

Rubaire & 10 Ors v Development Consultants Ltd (Civil Suit No. 370 of 2011)

High Court · [2015] UGCOMMC 57 · 2015 Judgment for Plaintiffs AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract, proceeding ex parte after defendant's non-appearance
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiffs for contract sums plus expenses with interest. Defendant's counterclaim dismissed. Claims of three plaintiffs (Kakunda Collins, Peter Senyonga, Nasake Joelia) withdrawn during proceedings.

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

Held that the defendant breached valid consultancy service agreements by failing to pay plaintiffs their professional fees despite written acknowledgement of debt and undertaking to pay. Judgment for plaintiffs on all proved claims with interest at 21% per annum from 1 May 2011. The court found the defendant's counterclaim and defence of late performance untenable as the defendant had acknowledged indebtedness without qualification and undertaken to pay by end of April 2011 regardless of earlier delays. General damages disallowed as plaintiffs entitled only to contractual debt plus interest.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiffs for contract sums plus expenses with interest. Defendant's counterclaim dismissed. Claims of three plaintiffs (Kakunda Collins, Peter Senyonga, Nasake Joelia) withdrawn during proceedings.

Facts

The defendant engaged eleven plaintiffs (university professors, researchers and GIS analysts) under separate consultancy contracts between April and September 2009 to conduct an entomological, animal parasitological, socio-economic and environmental baseline survey in Uganda under a government contract awarded to the defendant. The plaintiffs completed the research and submitted the final report in December 2010, which was accepted by the Ministry of Agriculture. Under the individual contracts, plaintiffs were to be paid specified professional fees (ranging from US$2,000 to US$12,000) in instalments, some upon submission of inception reports, draft reports and final reports. Some plaintiffs were paid 10% of their fees; others received nothing. Plaintiffs also incurred expenses for field assistants, car hire, laboratory services and data processing which defendant agreed to reimburse. On 4 April 2011, defendant acknowledged indebtedness in writing and undertook to pay all consultants by end of April 2011, but failed to do so. The defendant did not appear at multiple hearing dates despite personal service and the matter proceeded ex parte.

Issues

  1. Whether there were valid contracts between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant?
  2. Whether the Defendant breached those contracts?
  3. Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to the remedies sought?

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' suit allowed.
  • Prof Rubaire Akiiki awarded US$10,800 and Uganda shillings 2,000,750.
  • The Estate of Prof Bernard Kiremire awarded US$6,000 and Uganda shillings 12,000,000.
  • Prof Elizabeth Auma Opiyo awarded US$5,625 and Uganda shillings 2,000,000.
  • Prof Joseph Okello Onen awarded US$6,000 and Uganda shillings 3,500,000.
  • Associate Prof Peter Atekyereza awarded US$6,000 and Uganda shillings 11,580,000.
  • Dr. Grace Nangendo awarded US$5,600.
  • John Bosco Asiimwe awarded US$4,500.
  • Sheila Namuwaya awarded US$2,000.
  • Interest on all sums awarded at 21% per annum from 1 May 2011 to date of judgment.
  • Further interest at 21% per annum from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiffs.
  • Defendant's counterclaim dismissed with costs to the Plaintiffs.
  • General damages claim disallowed.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Failure to Pay Agreed Fees — Services Rendered
Where a party engages consultants to provide professional services under written contracts specifying fees and payment terms, and the consultants duly perform and complete the contracted services, failure to pay the agreed fees constitutes breach of duty arising out of the obligations undertaken by the contract.
Evidence — Acknowledgement of Debt — Effect on Fresh Cause of Action — Limitation
Under the Limitation Act sections 22(4) and 23, where a person liable for a liquidated pecuniary claim acknowledges the claim in writing signed by them, a fresh right of action accrues from the date of acknowledgement, and the acknowledgement need not state the specific amount owing provided the debt itself is clearly acknowledged and parole evidence may be admitted to prove the quantum.
Contract Law — Damages for Breach — Measure of Recovery — Debt Claims
Upon breach of a contract to pay money due, the amount recoverable is normally limited to the amount of the debt together with interest from the time when it became payable under the contract or as the court may allow. General damages are not awarded where the claim is for a liquidated debt.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Denials — General Denial Insufficient
Under Order 8 rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, denials of claims by the opposite party must be specific and not general. Where a defendant fails to specifically deny the claims of the plaintiff, the defendant is deemed to have admitted the claims.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (4)

  • Jarvis v Moy, Davies, Smith, Vandervell & Co [1936] 1 KB 399
  • Jones v Bellegrove Properties Ltd [1949] 2 All ER 198
  • Dungate v Dungate [1965] 3 All ER 393
  • Dharamshi v Karsan [1974] 1 EA 41

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rubaire & 10 Ors v Development Consultants Ltd (Civil Suit No. 370 of 2011) [2015] UGCommC 57 (27 March 2015)
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.