Wakilii

Total Uganda Ltd v Jim Ann Ltd (Civil Suit No.647 of 1991)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 27 · 1994 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 — default judgment and assessment of damages
Decision
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with damages and costs awarded

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 the agreement by appointing Shell (U) Ltd as dealer and evicting the plaintiff before the agreed period expired. Special damages awarded for capital expenditure on equipment and installation totaling UGX 6,615,600. General damages of UGX 2,000,000 awarded for loss of use of premises for the agreed 12-year period when plaintiff occupied for only one year. Interest awarded at court rates, not the 51% claimed.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiff with damages and costs awarded

Facts

On 13 July 1990, plaintiff Total Uganda Ltd and defendant Jim Ann Ltd entered an agreement whereby plaintiff was appointed agent to run a Total petrol station on defendant's premises at Plot 62/64 Jinja Municipal taxi car park. Plaintiff paid UGX 440,000 as consideration and invested substantial capital in equipment installation including pumping tanks, electrical installations, pump islands, and other infrastructure totaling over UGX 6 million. The agreement contemplated a grace period of two years followed by a minimum ten-year lease. Before the two years expired, defendant appointed Shell (U) Ltd as rival dealer for the same premises and forcefully evicted plaintiff. Defendant was served with summons but did not enter appearance or file defence. Court proceeded to assess damages under Order 9 Rule 6 Civil Procedure Rules.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant breached the agreement with the plaintiff by appointing a rival petrol dealer and evicting the plaintiff.
  2. What quantum of special and general damages should be awarded to the plaintiff for the breach.

Orders

  • Special damages of UGX 6,615,600 awarded to the plaintiff.
  • General damages of UGX 2,000,000 awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Interest at court rates awarded on the decretal sum.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Breach of Contract — Repudiation — Appointment of Rival Dealer
Where parties agree that the plaintiff will operate premises as agent for a specified period and the defendant appoints a rival operator and evicts the plaintiff before the agreed period expires, the defendant is in breach of the agreement and liable in damages.
Damages & Quantum — Special Damages — Capital Expenditure — Proof Required
Special damages for capital expenditure on equipment and installations are recoverable for breach of contract where the plaintiff proves the specific amounts expended through receipts and supporting documentation.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Loss of Use — Early Termination of Lease
General damages are recoverable where the defendant breaches an agreement by terminating the plaintiff's occupation after one year when the agreement contemplated use for twelve years, compensating the plaintiff for loss of use of the premises for the agreed period.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Rate of Interest — Court Discretion
Where no evidence establishes that capital expended was borrowed funds, the court will award interest at court rates rather than the higher contractual or commercial rate claimed by the plaintiff.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Assessment of Damages — Order 9 Rule 6
Where a defendant is properly served with summons but fails to enter appearance or file a defence, the court may proceed to assess damages pursuant to Order 9 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules upon satisfaction that service was effected.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Total Uganda Ltd v Jim Ann Ltd (Civil Suit No.647 of 1991) [1994] UGHC 27 (31 January 1994)
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.