Wakilii

Tarsis B Kabwegyere v Sheikh Adam Semugabe (HCT-00-CC-CS 662 of 2004)

High Court · [2005] UGCOMMC 36 · 2005 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of money filed under Order 33 of the Civil Procedure Rules, heard ex parte after defendant failed to appear following substituted service
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff; defendant ordered to refund Shs.20,400,000/- with interest and 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 where money is paid for the supply of goods on a consideration which has wholly failed, the payer is entitled to recover the sum as money had and received. The plaintiff proved payment of Shs.20,400,000/- to the defendant for motorcycles that were never delivered. The consideration having wholly failed, the defendant was ordered to refund the sum with interest at 25% per annum from judgment until full payment, plus costs.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff; defendant ordered to refund Shs.20,400,000/- with interest and costs

Facts

In July 2003, the plaintiff, an MP, sought to facilitate members of his constituency to obtain motorcycles on hire purchase. He was introduced to the defendant, a motorcycle dealer, by a parliamentary colleague. On 3 October 2003, the plaintiff paid the defendant Shs.20,400,000/- in one installment for the supply of motorcycles, which the defendant signed for on a voucher. The motorcycles were to be delivered within two weeks. The defendant never delivered any motorcycles. He issued a post-dated cheque for Shs.20,000,000/- dated 13 December 2003 promising to pay the balance of Shs.400,000/- in cash, but the cheque was dishonoured. The plaintiff later refunded money that his constituents had deposited under the scheme. Despite being granted leave to defend, the defendant failed to appear at trial following substituted service.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff paid the defendant a sum of Shs.20,400,000/- for the supply of motorcycles.
  2. Whether the defendant delivered the motorcycles as agreed.
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the payment on the basis of total failure of consideration.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendant.
  • Defendant to refund to the Plaintiff the sum of Shs.20,400,000/- (Twenty million four hundred thousand).
  • Defendant to pay interest on the decretal sum at the rate of 25% per annum from the date of judgment till payment in full.
  • Defendant to pay costs of the suit.
  • Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Restitution — Total Failure of Consideration
Money paid by one person to another on a consideration which has wholly failed is recoverable as money had and received to the use of the payer.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Hearing — Failure to Appear After Substituted Service
Where a defendant granted leave to defend fails to appear after substituted service has been effected, the plaintiff is entitled to proceed to state and prove the claim in the absence of the defendant.
Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Non-Delivery of Goods
Where goods are paid for but never delivered and no evidence is adduced to show delivery, the payer is entitled to recover the purchase price on the basis of total failure of consideration.

Legislation cited (1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tarsis B Kabwegyere v Sheikh Adam Semugabe (HCT-00-CC-CS 662 of 2004) [2005] UGCommC 36 (30 June 2005)
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.