• cepil_admin
  • No Comments

On Breach of Contractual Obligations and the Relief Available to the Affected Party

JOHN KIBYAMI V MISSION & RELIEF TRANSPORT

This case was decided on 17th June in the Court of Appeal by Justices of Appeal (JJA) KENNETH KAKURU, GEOFFREY KIRYABWIRE, CHEBORION BARISHAKI.

This case discusses breach of contractual obligations and the relief available to the affected party.

This was an appeal from the judgment and orders of the high court of Uganda at Kampala (commercial division) before Hon justice Lameck Mukasa on 23rd April 2010 in civil suit no 263 of 2006.

The case in High court was that the respondent hired the appellant’s vehicle to transport some goods from Entebbe airport to southern Sudan and the parties agreed to the cost of hire being 5m shillings. The appellant loaded the goods and on instruction of the respondent he made a stopover at multiple ICD Nakawa for purposes of verification and payment of taxes. The respondent failed to pay and or to clear taxes. The appellants vehicle remained parked at the offices until the suit was instituted. The trial court found in favor of the respondents and the appellant appealed.

The judges in their decision discussed breach of contract in accordance with S.61(a) of the Contracts Act of 2010 that where there’s a breach of contract, the party who suffers breach is entitled to receive from thee party who breaches the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him/her.

For a loss arising from breach of contract to be recoverable, it must be such as the party in breach should have reasonably contemplated as not likely to result. The precise nature of the loss does not have to be in his/her contemplation.

The judges stated the common law rule that where a party sustains a loss by reason of a breach of contract, he ought to be placed in the same situation by award of general damages as if the contract had been performed.