Shell (U) Ltd v Mukiibi (Civil Appeal No.69 of 2004)
Observed later treatment
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 respondent's diesel vehicle stalled after being fuelled with water-contaminated diesel at the appellant's station. The Court held the respondent had a duty to mitigate his loss, which he partly failed to do by refusing the appellant's offer to repair the engine, though he was also partly prevented from removing the vehicle. Loss of earnings claimed as special damages was not specifically proved, so an award of general damages was permissible. Finding the High Court's award of Shs.130,000,000 too high, the Court allowed the appeal in part, set aside the orders and substituted an award of Shs.65,000,000 general damages.
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; High Court award reduced from Shs.130,000,000 to Shs.65,000,000 general damages
Facts
The respondent owned a 26-seater coaster minibus operated in the taxi business. On 11 September 2000 the vehicle, while hired to carry mourners, was refuelled with diesel at the appellant's Shell Malindi station at Natete. The vehicle developed problems and stalled, and was towed back to the station. Samples taken from the underground tank and the vehicle established that the diesel was contaminated with water. The appellant subsequently made a without-prejudice offer to repair or replace the engine and meet incidental costs, but did not offer to compensate for loss of income. The respondent rejected the offer, demanding payment for one month's lost income as a precondition, and filed suit. There was unchallenged evidence that the appellant's agents prevented the respondent from removing the vehicle for repair. The High Court found the appellant liable and awarded Shs.130,000,000 for loss of earnings plus replacement of the engine, interest and costs. The appellant appealed.
Issues
- Whether the respondent had an obligation to mitigate his loss.
- Whether the Court of Appeal can revisit the award of damages made by the High Court.
Orders
- Appeal allowed in part.
- Judgment and orders of the High Court set aside.
- Judgment entered for the respondent for Shs.65,000,000 general damages.
- Shs.20,000 refund of fuel price.
- Interest on the above at 10% from the date of the High Court judgment until payment in full.
- Costs in the lower court awarded to the respondent.
- Each party to bear its own costs of the appeal.
- The respondent to tow away his vehicle within 7 days from the date hereof.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (10)
- Standard Chartered Bank v Emag AG (Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2003)
- Spencon Services Ltd v Tom Ogwal (Civil Appeal No. 41 of 2004)
- Gaku Reagan and Others v Uganda Securico Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2003)
- Kensrow Industries Ltd v CC Chandran (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2007)
- Shamji v Bhatt (1965) EA 789
- Kibimba Rice Co Ltd v Umar Salim (Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1988)
- Benedicto Musisi v Attorney General (HCCS No. 62 of 1989)
- Borham-carter VS Hyde Park Hotel Ltd [1984] 5 TLR 177
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Matiya Wasswa (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1998)
- CA Express Trans Co v BAT Tanzania (1968) EA 443
Cases citing this judgment (6)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
- Odeke Joseph and Another v Dusabe Mary and Others (Civil Suit No. 400 of 2017; Civil Suit No. 58 of 2019)
- Nansambu Susan and Wafula Wanami Robert v Nambuya Jennifer (Civil Appeal No. 124 of 2024)
- Komakech & 7 Ors v Ayaa & Anor (CIVIL APPEAL No. 0028 OF 2016)
- Katete & Anor v L.B.Narashino Auto Parts Ltd & Anor (Civil Suit No. 394 of 2014)
- Kamuntu v Sendagire & Anor (CIVIL SUIT NO. 188 OF 2009)
- Watsemwa & anor v Attorney general (Civil Suit No. 675 of 2006) followed
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.