Wakilii

Topista Achora v Namungoma Transport & Produce Dealers Co. Op. Society Ltd. (Civil Suit No. 563 of 1990)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 82 · 1992 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for breach of contract, heard ex parte after defendant failed to appear
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with damages, 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

Held that a binding verbal contract existed whereby the defendant society would pay the plaintiff weekly profit of UGX 50,000 for use of her capital of UGX 580,000 in a coffee produce venture. When the plaintiff demanded payment in January 1990 and the defendant failed to pay, the defendant breached the contract. The plaintiff was entitled to general damages for breach of contract measured by loss of weekly profit, but could not recover the principal sum by action for breach rather than action for money had and received.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with damages, interest, and costs

Facts

The plaintiff paid UGX 580,000 to the defendant co-operative society for a verbal coffee produce venture. Under the agreement, the defendant would use the funds to purchase coffee from farmers, process it, and sell it to the Coffee Marketing Board. In return, the plaintiff was to receive weekly profit of UGX 50,000 commencing January 1989. The plaintiff agreed to plough back her 1989 profits into the venture to increase capital. In October 1989, the plaintiff requested UGX 50,000 but the defendant refused, claiming it had no money. In January 1990, the plaintiff repudiated the agreement and demanded her capital plus accumulated profits. The defendant refused to pay. The matter proceeded ex parte as the defendant and counsel failed to appear.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract.
  2. Whether there has been any breach of such contract.
  3. What remedies are available to the plaintiff if breach is established.

Orders

  • Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff.
  • General damages awarded to the plaintiff in the sum of UGX 1,560,000.
  • Interest awarded on general damages at the rate of 40% per annum from January 1990 until payment in full.
  • Defendant to pay costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Formation — Essential Elements — Offer, Acceptance, and Consideration
To form a binding simple contract, three essential elements must be present: an offer from one side setting out the terms of the proposed agreement, acceptance of that offer by the other side, and consideration moving from either side.
Contract Law — Breach — Remedies — Damages for Breach
Where a party commits a breach of contract, the innocent party is entitled to treat the contract as having been discharged by the breach and sue for damages for breach of contract on the principle of putting the plaintiff, as far as money can do, to the position the plaintiff was in before the injury complained of had been committed.
Contract Law — Remedies — Recovery of Money Paid — Total Failure of Consideration
Where the innocent party has paid money to the guilty party under a contract, recovery of that money by action for money had and received is available only where the consideration for the payment has totally failed. Such recovery is not available in an action framed as damages for breach of contract.
Contract Law — Estoppel — Variation of Terms — Party Cannot Rely on Breach After Agreeing to Variation
Where a party to a contract has agreed to vary the terms of performance by requesting that payment be deferred and profits ploughed back into the venture, that party is estopped from subsequently claiming that the other party committed a breach by failing to make payment during the period covered by the variation.
Damages & Quantum — Interest on Damages — Commercial Transactions — Bank Rate
In commercial transactions, interest on damages should be awarded at a rate corresponding to the prevailing bank rate to compensate the plaintiff for being deprived of the use of money from the moment when the loss was incurred.

Cases cited (2)

  • Chity on contract 25rd Ed. Paragraph 1535
  • Philips v Hards (1953)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Topista Achora v Namungoma Transport & Produce Dealers Co. Op. Society Ltd. (Civil Suit No. 563 of 1990) [1992] UGHC 82 (12 May 1992)
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.