Wakilii

Universal Engineering Works v Essaji (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 1950)

East African Court of Appeal · Universal Engineering Works v Essaji (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 1950) [1951] EACA 324 (1 January 1951) · 1951 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from decision of the Resident Magistrate's Court at Mombasa
Decision
Judgment altered in favour of appellant with award of Sh. 809/07 representing purchase price less diminution for inferior blocks

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

Where a contract for the sale of goods is non-severable and the buyer has accepted part of the goods delivered, the buyer cannot reject inferior goods that were delivered together with accepted goods but may only claim a diminution in price as a breach of warranty under section 13(1)(c) of the Sale of Goods Ordinance.

Outcome

Judgment altered in favour of appellant with award of Sh. 809/07 representing purchase price less diminution for inferior blocks

Facts

The appellant sold 1,500 coral blocks to the respondent at Sh. 55 per 100 from a specified stack on the appellant's land. Delivery was to take place on site. The respondent sent a hired lorry with labour to collect the blocks over 15 occasions. The respondent admitted receiving 1,500 blocks but claimed to have accepted only 1,323 and rejected 177 as not being in accordance with the contract. The Resident Magistrate found that only 1,120 blocks were in accordance with the contract and that the respondent was entitled to reject 380 blocks. The appellant sued for the full purchase price of Sh. 825. Some of the blocks delivered were of inferior quality and did not come from the approved stack. The inferior blocks were mixed with good blocks in the deliveries.

Issues

  1. Whether a party is bound by admissions in pleadings regarding the quantity of goods rejected.
  2. Whether acceptance of goods occurred at the place of delivery or at the buyer's premises.
  3. Whether a buyer who has accepted part of goods under a non-severable contract can reject inferior goods delivered together with accepted goods under section 13(1)(c) of the Sale of Goods Ordinance.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Judgment of the Resident Magistrate altered.
  • Judgment entered for the appellant for Sh. 809/07.
  • Appellant awarded costs of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Pleadings — Binding Effect of Admissions
A party to a suit is bound by admissions in pleadings which must be taken as true and cannot be contradicted by evidence unless and until the pleading has been amended.
Sale of Goods — Acceptance — Time and Place
Acceptance of goods under section 36 of the Sale of Goods Ordinance does not necessarily occur at the place of delivery merely because the buyer had opportunity to examine the goods there; acceptance may occur when the buyer does an act inconsistent with the seller's ownership after delivery.
Sale of Goods — Non-Severable Contracts — Rejection of Part
Where a contract of sale is non-severable and the buyer has accepted part of the goods, section 13(1)(c) of the Sale of Goods Ordinance precludes the buyer from rejecting inferior goods delivered together with accepted goods; the breach can only be treated as a breach of warranty entitling the buyer to a diminution in price.
Sale of Goods — Section 30(3) — Goods of Inferior Quality
Section 30(3) of the Sale of Goods Ordinance does not apply where goods of the kind ordered were delivered but some were of inferior quality; the word 'description' is to be strictly construed and does not extend to quality defects.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Sale of Goods Ordinance s.13(1)(c)
  • Sale of Goods Ordinance s.30(3)
  • Sale of Goods Ordinance s.35
  • Sale of Goods Ordinance s.36

Cases cited (1)

  • Aitken, Campbell and Co. v Boullen (1908) Sess. Cas. 490

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Universal Engineering Works v Essaji (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 1950) [1951] EACA 324 (1 January 1951)
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.