[2008] UGCommC 35

[2008] UGCommC 35

The parties entered into a binding agreement to appoint an expert to determine the quantum of work done and the amount payable. The expert, Buildecon East Africa, produced a report establishing the value of works done and the payments made. The defendant failed to pay its share of the expert's fees and did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] UGCommC 35
Parties
Plaintiff: Andreas Wipfler T/A Wipfler Designers & Co.; Defendant: Meera Investments Ltd
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-CS 28 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Final Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Construction Contracts, Expert Determination, Binding Settlement Agreements, Quantum of Work Done
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Alternative Dispute Resolution Construction Contracts Expert Determination Binding Settlement Agreements Quantum of Work Done

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andreas Wipfler T/A Wipfler Designers & Co.

Plaintiff

Meera Investments Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to payment for design and construction works performed for the defendant at Munyonyo.
  2. 2 Whether the parties are bound by the expert report commissioned to resolve the dispute.
  3. 3 What is the quantum of money due to the plaintiff from the defendant under the agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The parties entered into a binding agreement to appoint an expert to determine the quantum of work done and the amount payable. The expert, Buildecon East Africa, produced a report establishing the value of works done and the payments made. The defendant failed to pay its share of the expert's fees and did not obtain or comment on the report, despite ample opportunity. The court found that the agreement to be bound by the expert report was valid and enforceable, and the defendant's failure to participate further did not vitiate the binding nature of the agreement. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to enforce the parties' settlement mechanism and entered judgment for the...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff in the sum of UGX 172,770,293.00.
  • Defendant to pay costs of the suit.